Sunday, June 22, 2014
Prompt No. 2 "Redskins" Racist or Free Speech?
So the "Redskins" football team has lost its Federal Trademark. In other words, the US Government will no longer protect the title "Redskins" as it relates to this football team. Why? Because the US Patent and Trademark Office, which is an office created by Congress with power granted to it to do so by the US Constitution, has decided that the term is RACIST. Most agree. But is it illegal to be racist? Is using this name for their team "free speech" and therefore protected under the first amendment?
Read the attached editorial/opinion piece. Feel free to read more if you like. But in the end, do you agree with the US Patent and Trademark Office to rescind the trademark or do you think that this is a free speech issue, as discussed in the editorial? Happy WRiting!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
70 comments:
The Redskin name should be protected under the First Amendment. Really, it is racist, but it isn't a crime to be racist. Whether or not the team name should be changed should be up to the league. If the NFL does not want to permit any teams within the league to have derogatory names, then it should take action. The US Government is indirectly forcing a name change (If the name isn't trade marked, how the hell is the team supposed to make any revenue from the sales of sports attire?). Not to mention, I don't hear anyone making a fuss about the name of the New York YANKEES. Yankee was an offensive term coined by the Cherokee to refer to European settlers. The term Yankee was also used as a derogatory reference to Northerners by Southerners during the Civil War Era. Now the issue isn't even a First Amendment issue anymore, but a Fourteenth Amendment issue. The Fourteenth Amendment requires the government to apply the law equally, and can't arbitrarily discriminate against people or GROUPS. Bottom line, the US Government is acting unconstitutionally, despite the fact that the team does have a racist name.
By all means the term "Redskins" is racist and offensive towards some people, but that doesn't mean the government has a right to no longer protect that title. Its a freedom of speech, something guaranteed to us by the first amendment. Its entirely up to the owner of the team to decide what the team name will be not the Governments or the Us Patent and Trademark Office. If people really cared about what the name being the "Redskins" they wouldn't support the team by watching and going to games or buying their merchandise.
Ed and Jessica are right; the term “Redskins” is one hundred percent racist. The question I have, is why the US Patent and Trademark Office trademarked the name in the first place if it was racist? It’s like giving the right to a person to do something then taking it away. I agree the name of team should be changed because there is a group of people who are being impacted by it, but those who are being negatively impacted by the name and those who support some type of change should persuade the NFL to take action. In a democratic nation, I see why the government stepped in and that is because the government is for the people, but now that the government has stepped into this issue, the government will be forced to step into other issues involving racist names, like Ed mentioned, the NY Yankees. In the end, it should be the people who take action not the government.
-Bronsin Benyamin
I think we can all agree "Redskins" is pretty racist. This term played a negative role in our nation's history and it's offensive towards a specific group of people. The government did step in, but I don't agree with how they did it. I agree with the statement Bronsin had said about it being the people taking action rather than the government. With enough people taking a stand to say that they're offended by this term, that's when it's time to step in. The fact that they just now revoked the trademark after so long of it being approved is a little ridiculous. As Jessica said, if people really cared about the name they wouldn't have spent money on all that merchandise. It's up to the owner to make the changes and as offensive as it is, there's no real crime being made. The government should have protected that patent as they did previously.
The Redskins' football team name is racist. It is not illegal to be racist though. This is a practice of freedom of speech. Although that maybe the case, as people living in a society we should take into consideration other's feelings towards the situation. People should not have to feel uncomfortable with a team name that is a derogatory term. I believe that many people acted upon their feelings towards this hateful team name. Otherwise, I don't believe that The US Patent and Trademark Office would revoke it. It was trademarked it because they knew money would be made. The moment they found out people take offense to what they've done, they had to change their standpoint because it does effect their reputation. Even though I don't think the Us Patent and Trademark office did it for all of the right reasons, it shows the team that there is less support for the derogatory term and I believe that it's what needs to happen. As a society we should burry that term and I believe we're doing so by using freedom of speech to show our offense to the team name. It corresponds with the government doing what we would like to be done after hearing our complaints.
As a society, we have much bigger problems than the name of a football team.The Redskins have been a football team for 80 years and all of a sudden their name has become a big deal. There are plenty of teams with names that could be seen as racist towards Native Americans, like The Blackhawks, Indians, and Braves.I know that it might be racist toward certain people, but its just a name,just because some people are against a name doesn't mean we have to get rid of it or change it,or else it wouldn't really be freedom if the NFL can't name there football team however they want.
-Regina Andres
The name "Redskins" is racist and it should not be the name of the team because of it being offensive, but sadly, it is a crime to be racist. The name of the team falls under free speech and therefore it should be protected by the First Amendment which then means that the government has no right or power to try take the name away from the team. If their reasoning for not protecting the title is because it is racist, then just like Ed said, it is very odd that the US Patent and Trademark Office would not protect the "Redskins" name, but still protect other teams with a derogatory name. Even though the name is racist and it is offensive to some people, the government cannot try to change it. It is up to the people to decide whether to support the name or not and mainly the owner of the team has a choice to change it.
Cynthia, you said that we should "burry the term". Have you heard the saying, "Those who bury the past, are doomed to repeat it?" History isn't always butterflies and rainbows. The darker parts of history are just as, if not more, important to remember. Not to mention, there is a theater named The Redskin Theater in Anadarko, Oklahoma (a city with a population that is 41% "Native American"), yet the name of said theater hasn't been an issue to the city for sixty-seven years.
Jessica, you closed by stating that, "If people really cared about what the name being the "Redskins" they wouldn't support the team by watching and going to games or buying their merchandise." Did you consider the fact that the people protesting the name of the team, may also be boycotting the team?
Last comment from me, I swear. Cynthia, you closed your statement with, "It corresponds with the government doing what we would like to be done after hearing our complaints." This would only happen if the government were listening to the majority, which in this case it is, but that isn't the point of government. The government his really here to protect the minority from being taken advantage of, or forced to do something by the majority. Let's take gay marriage for example. A majority of the population is against it, but the government making court rulings that it is unconstitutional to ban it, is an example of what the government was created to do. Protect the minority from the majority.
I do not believe that the US Patent and Trademark Office did anything wrong by no longer protecting the title "Redskins" from Washington. I believe this because they are associated with Congress which deals with affairs concerning the American people. In that case they should not be supporting any type of organization that can be termed "racist," which in this example are the Redskins because that can be offensive to many people. I don't think that they should have to be change their name because they are still protected under the First Amendment of freedom of speech but that works both ways which means with the US Patent Office also. They should be able to support and service anybody they choose to. So if that means not supporting the Redskins, so be it.
I completely agree with Ed's comments. The Redskin name should be protected under the First Amendment. Unfortunately, it is not a crime to be racist, even though it is considered to be morally wrong. The US Patent and Trademark Office had to do what it had to do; they put the pressure on Daniel Snyder, the owner of the Redskins, to come to terms and change the name of the team. Ed makes a solid point that the US Patent and Trademark Office is actually violating an amendment, which is the 14th amendment. Not only are there derogatory names in sports such as the: New York Yankees, Cleveland Indians, Cincinnati Reds, and the Kansas City Chiefs, but the US Government has not done a damn thing in regards to their derogatory names. In my opinion, if the US Patent and Trademark Office is going to rescind the trademark of the name "Redskins", it must do it to all of the other racially derogatory names in sports.
Also, it is quite obvious that Snyder is sticking to his guns. If fans are really serious about their protest of the use of the Redskin name, they must do what all businessmen fear: hurt the wallet. Stop buying the tickets. Stop buying the merchandise. We will see how the Redskin's total revenue fares when this upcoming season ends. If there appears to be a decline in revenue, then and only then will Snyder have no choice but to change the name. If there is anything that we have learned from all of this, it is that money is power. If Snyder is not losing money, then in retrospect, he should not care about changing the team name.
The term Redskins is a derogatory term used to reference people from Native American descent. In this case however, it is only being used as a name for an NFL team, not as an insult or a jab at the Native American community. I believe that giving the team this name should be seen as a good thing. The trademark is making lots of money, and some is even being donated to Native American communities, if I am not mistaken. The US Patent and Trademark Office should let it be, they granted the right to the Washington Redskins organization to use this name before, and are only now trying to take action because some people are being sensitive over an NFL teams NAME.
-Isaiah Alberdin
Free speech is less than accurate. The first amendment does not give us the ability to say whatever whenever, one of the exceptions is that the government has an interest of public safety. The term redskin is indeed racist and the result has been many protest which could turn violent. For this reason I believe it is constitutional to not protect the redskin name, although the right thing to do would to just say it is racist the constitution protects racism just not when it could get violent. Stanford has already learned this lesson and who knows maybe we will see a tree as the new mascot.
Just because we are given the privilege of free speech this doesn’t allow us to go around and say whatever we want especially when our words are causing others pain. Even if it’s not illegal to be racist it doesn’t make it ok to inflict pain on others because of your racist views. Many people have protested against the use of the racist term redskin. It may be just a team name but is it really worth it when this name brings back so many bad memories. We don’t need to bury the past but we also don’t have to keep reliving it. I would agree that the Redskin name should not be supported by the government.
-Jasmine Johal
Question to the two previous people. So if my words anger people, and a group of protesters form, and the group turns violent, I have to give up my right to say the words that angered those people, as opposed to them giving up their right to protest?
The term "Redskin" is indeed racist and derogatory towards native americans and they have every right to be angry and throw tantrums, however the football team name should still be protected US Patent and Trademark. First and foremost, the team has their right to Free Speech unless what they are saying will cause native americans harm in any way, which they are not,. They also would not be slandering them because slander would be like ruining their opportunities at a job or having them be ignored by the public.
The Washington Redskins have had a long history with the name “Redskins” ever since the early 1930’s
and their have been protests about the name of the team over the years, but more recently has been a call for a name change. The term “redskin” is indeed offensive and racist, however, it is not illegal to be racist so I believe the Washington Redskins shouldn’t be forced to changed their name and are protected by the First Amendment as it is the rights of the owner who created the team at the time to name the team whatever he wanted. I agree that the US Patent and Trademark Office did a correct job of not protecting the title “Redskins” anymore. I believe that the term “redskins” is racist and offensive, but it is up to the NFL to force a team name change and not the government.
- Anthony Hoang
In retrospect, the term “Redskins” has always been known as a derogatory and racist term regardless whether it is directed toward the race or the sports team. In any case it is wrong to be defending any type of racism in any form. I agree with the US Patent and Trademark Office’s morals in their choice to drop protection of the title, but I disagree with the final decision. Since it is technically not illegal to be racist, the Washington Redskins should be protected under the First Amendment and should not have to change their name. Ultimately the owner of the team and officials of NFL should be responsible of any future name changes rather than the government.
The source of “Redskin” seems to still be debated upon, with some believing it was the Natives who first coined the term to represent themselves rather than their oppressors. Because of this, one of the biggest arguments regarding this issue is whether the team name is racist which, of course, leads to the question of whether it really should be changed. According to the dictionary definition, “redskin” is a derogatory name for Native Americans (similar to other racial slurs used for Chinese, Japanese, blacks, etc.) Although it may not be used for the purpose of offending anyone today, given its etymology, it is offensive like any other racial slur. It looks like a lot of us agree that it’s a racist name even if we’re using it to address a sports team rather than call someone by a racial slur with a negative connotation, but most longtime fans of the team have thought otherwise because a.) they weren’t offended by the term or b.) believed the name and logo should remain the same for the sake of “tradition”. Of course it isn’t illegal at all to be racist; Everyone is allowed under the First Amendment to have their own opinions and voice them freely. Also according to the First Amendment, the government cannot force a change on the team’s name or logo because that would violate the owner’s right to freedom of speech. No law is being broken for naming a sports team something that may be offensive to a certain group of people, which is one of the primary arguments for those who wish to keep the “Redskin” name and logo. But I think it’s fair to point out that while some articles state things like, “The majority of Native Americans don’t find this term offensive/don’t find it necessary for the name to be changed”, there are several individuals from multiple tribes who considered the name of this Northeastern United States football team inappropriate and have been trying to bring public attention to the subject for years. I say this because I agree with Bronsin’s opinion that the people rather than the government should rally for change, which is what seems to be happening already among some Native American tribes in that area. However considering their relatively small numbers compared to other groups of people nationwide (2% including Alaska Natives) and definitely an even smaller number in and around Washington state, is it not reasonable to say that it was the people who brought this situation to attention and impacted some change? At any rate, only the owner can change the name and logo of his team which may come later due either to public or financial pressure. I don’t think it was wrong for the US Patent and Trademark Office to discontinue support for a name which openly offends so many people but as Ed pointed out earlier, this ruling opens up a new issue of other teams with derogatory titles.
As a person with a multiracial background which consists of Japanese, Irish, and Native American (Blackfoot) ancestry, I have to note my distaste of American football. (I may or may not have referred to it as 'sissy rugby', and am trying to overcome the exaggerated misgivings that I have.) I believe that the Trademark Office was right to rescind the legal rights to the Redskins name, as that is just a derogatory term that those who were prejudiced and privileged cursed upon a people who did not want it. Building upon what Ed said and forgive me if I seem to have missed other people's replies( there's blank boxes everywhere), but while Yankee is derogatory (it's the equivalent of cholo in Japanese), there is less of a negative connotation to the term than of lackluster baseball teams, there is also a sense of pride, it seems to me, that Americans take on that name. As for the NFL, if they want to be effective, they should take clear-cut actions such as penalizing teams that do not comply with their request.
The term "Redskins" is definitely offensive and racist, but they aren't the only sports team that has a derogatory name, like Ed said. I don't think that it's the government's job to regulate what the name of sports teams are. The only reason the government should intervene is if there are petitions. It isn't against the law to be racist, everyone can think how they want to think. Freedom of speech protects the racist people along with the excepting people. The over all decision to change the name though should be up to the NFL. The name is protected by free speech, but I don't think it's the governments job to figure out sports teams names.
I disagree with the Trademark Office's decision to rescind the trademark because it is a infraction of free speech. As Ed said, the NFL should decide whether to change the name or not, and so far they have not taken those actions. Although it is an offensive name to Native Americans, no one is being hurt by the team using the name. It has been in use for decades and no one made a fuss about it until recently. The team even donates money every year to the Native American tribes across the nation. If people really wanted to make a statement about the use of the Redskins name, something much more drastic would have to happen like boycotting games or not buying merchandise. The teams owner, Dan Synder, is not going to change the name as he has said multiple times. It's simply not going to happen, as he says. This is a free speech issue and the government has got to stick by the First Amendment and let this issue be.
-Varun Kaushal
While the U.S. shouldn't be allowed to prevent the Redskins from using that name. It is free speech no matter how racist it is. Of course this name is a slur against natives, but by restricting it's usage under any circumstances, you are restricting the person using that word's first amendment right of free speech.It is not that there is a law that restricts us from naming anything after other slurs it is people's conscious. To answer the question, the term "Redskins" is both racist and free speech.
Racism isn’t technically illegal. It’s obviously morally wrong, but as far as being illegal, unless it interferes in something like your job, it’s legal, unfortunately. Amendment one protects it, saying that one can profess whatever they believe, also called Freedom of Speech. However, the Supreme Court recognizes that there are some limits to free speech, since sometimes it can go too far. Moreover, looking at the Redskins name as racist, it’s complicated. Redskin is one of the most derogatory names you can call a Native American and it’s not surprising that both in 1993 and this year they received complaints. It also violates §2 (a) of the Trademark Act of 1946, which states that a trademark cannot consist of immoral matter or disparage connections with persons, whether they be dead or alive. My view on this is that, though it is not illegal to be racist, it was wrong to allow a team to have a racist name that already had one complaint. If anything the government prevented future conflicts, considering t Native Americans have already been mistreated by the government for a while.
-Francisco Alvarez
The Washington Redskins NFL team has been around for eighty-two years. The name was changed to Redskins in 1933 by the owner George Preston Marshall. He claimed it was named in honor of the teams native american coach Lone Star Dietz. If this term was ever truly offensive it would have been changed tens of years ago. To have the current US Presidential Administration advice the US Patent and Trademark Office to withdraw the rights of the name "Redskins" is a blatant over reach of political correctness by this administration. The NFL team name is a freedom of speech issue and the US Patent and Trademark Office should not punish a business in a capitalist society.
~Katherine Neal
The "Redskins" may be a racist name that is used for the team but it is not illegal to be racist. There are people who say racist things but that doesn't make it a crime. It just means they are morally wrong in what they are doing or saying. I do believe that the "Redskins" football team are protected under the First Amendment because of their rights of freedom of speech. The owner of the football team should be the one who decides whether or not the name should be changed. The government cannot take action since the First Amendment is valid to the team's freedom of speech. I agree with why the US Patent and Trademark Office had done what they did because it is understandable. They feel like it is a racial issue leading them to revoke the trademark on the team.
- Richard Ting
I agree with Ed’s and Bronsin’s opinions. Racism is unacceptable, but it is not illegal to be racist. The team’s name should be considered free speech and be protected by the First Amendment. Although the term “Redskins” is derogatory to some people, I don’t think using this name for a football team should be a big issue because it is just a sport team and it doesn’t have any offenses to Native Americans. I don’t agree with the US Patent and Trademark Office to rescind the trademark. Like what Bronsin said, if people really don’t like that name, they should protest until they can force the Redskins football team to change its name, and the government should have not solved this problem. By the way, I found out the information about the team’s name like what Katherine said. The Washington Redskin’s original name is Boston Braves. The owner changed the name because there was a baseball team also named Braves, and the change was in recognition of the coach who claimed himself a part of Native America. The name Redskins seems more like an honor than an offense to the team.
-Minh Truong
The term "Redskins" is a derogatory term. Unfortunately it isn't a crime to be racist. The term "Redskins" should be protected under the first amendment. The US government is forcing a name change that was Federal Trademark. It isn't right for the Redskins to lose their trademark. As Ed and Michael stated their isn't any fuss over the other derogatory term names such as the Yankees, Reds, and Chiefs.If the US government is going to revoke the federal trademark of the Redskins they might as well revoke teams of other derogatory terms. The names of these teams isn't morally right, yet they should be protected under the first amendment. The only thing that is being broken is the fourteenth amendment by the government. They aren't enforcing the law so that groups aren't discriminated against. As many people have said already the people need to step in as suppose to the government if change to these names is to be seen. -Markos Kassahun
In my opinion, the "Redskins" title is racist. But because it is not illegal to be racist, we certainly cannot do anything about it. This is freedom of speech, as the First Amendment states. But in the society we live in being considerate of others is respected. Which is why the US patent and Trademark office would try to revoke it.They trademarked the name because they knew that it would cause a lot of attention, and bring in revenue. I am not surprised that they changed their viewpoints as soon as asked about the name . I think that the US patent and Trademark office taking a stand shows that they do not support the teams name.
Although I don’t think they were trying to be racist, the name “Redskins” is a derogatory term. However, it is not illegal to be racist and “Redskins” should be protected under the First Amendment. Their trademark was registered in 1967, but due to recent criticism from Native Americans who have spoken out and petitioned, the US Patent and Trademark Office is now deciding to revoke the trademark. I don’t think the US Government really wanted to take these actions, but they were put into this position and because this is the government of the people, they had to do what the people wanted. Nevertheless, like others mentioned, this brings up the fact that other sport teams also have derogatory names and no action has been taken against them. If the government is to remain equal and fair, then these other teams should also have their trademark revoked, not just the Washington Redskins. -Vicky Le
Vicky, I posted this earlier and a part of your reply made me want to direct his at you as well. You said, " this is the government of the people, they had to do what the people wanted." This would only happen if the government were listening to the majority, which in this case it is, but that isn't the point of government. The government his really here to protect the minority from being taken advantage of, or forced to do something by the majority. Let's take gay marriage for example. A majority of the population is against it, but the government making court rulings that it is unconstitutional to ban it, is an example of what the government was created to do. Protect the minority from the majority.
It shouldn't be illegal to be racist, because people should be entitled to their own personal beliefs and opinions (however unfavorable they may be). However, it is illegal to harm others or infringe on their rights in any way based on said opinion. Given the circumstances in this case the government should not have interfered the way that it did. The term is derogatory, but that's only because we associate it with history and the purpose of the terms creation. But like others have said before if the people really took offense to it then it is on them to change it. Then again change had not been asked for decades. It's free speech in the matter that the purpose is not to incite anything or is actively degrading native americans. The purpose is to put an image and name to a sports team. I agree with Ed in that if they were to make a change, it should be applied to all teams as well. Since it isn't harmful and the purpose isn't to offend or harm people then the team should have a right to decide what they want to be named. ~Huong Le
The US Patent and Trademark Office should protect the title “Redskins”. The term itself in any way used is racist. Yet, racism isn’t a crime nor is using racist comments, most people now use racist stereotypes as a joke. Under the First Amendment is the right to free speech that should apply to this case. A reason why racism isn’t illegal is because it’s an opinion that is allowed to be expressed. Under the Fourteenth Amendment leaving the the term “Redskins” unprotected would make them unequal to have the term “Yankees” be protected for it’s also a racist term and is therefore not applying the law equally to all groups. The term was chosen for not its meaning as a derogatory term but for its meaning in history just like “49ers”, “Steelers”, “Yankees” and “76ers”.
I both agree and disagree with the US Patent and Trademark Office’s decision. The team’s name has been a controversial issue under fire for a long time and causing uproar among the people with no signs of settling down. I believe the decision to no longer protect the name will gain trust and respect from the people for the government. Also the name is blatantly racist and to allow and protect it would be against core American values. Although, I believe the US Patent and Trademark Office budged under pressure when making this decision. We are a country known for our free speech. Shouldn’t this carry over to names too? The government did nothing to pacify protesters of the Westboro Baptist Church because technically they were protected under the First Amendment, yet when it comes to a team name they withdraw support because a large majority doesn’t like it. I do not think the US Patent and Trademark Office should take back their decision but the government overall should be more consistent in issues regarding “Freedom of Speech”.
-Samantha Salazar
No, I do not believe the federal government had the right to rescind the trademark even though the term itself is racist towards Native Americans. Although the name holds historical and rich traditions within the football organization, it is a racist and derogatory towards the natives. However, the organization had a right to that name and had been federally protected until it became an issue recently. It was then illegally taken away due to public discontent towards the "Redskin" name. This was an illegal action as the "freedom of speech" entitlement protects the organization from having its mascot taken away. In conclusion, no matter how rude, racist, or ignorant a team name may be, it must be protected under the freedom of speech entitlement by the federal government.
-Luis Godinez
Racism is not illegal but offensive, it can't be because it is just the way people feels about certain type of people. The term "Redskins" should be protected under the first amendment. I agree Katherine's opinion, if the term "Redskins" offensive it would have been changed years ago. But that term is offensive towards some people. I think changing the name of a football team is not going to change people feeling towards racist. The government shouldn't take away the Redskins trademark. - Nhi Nguyen
I believe that the Redskins team name, and term in general truly is racist and very offensive, but it should be protected by the First Amendment which grants freedom of speech. It is up to the NFL and all other people who organize the leagues to decide whether or not the team should keep or get rid of the name. Also I agree that it is not illegal to be racist which means that the US Patent and Trademark Office do not have the right to decide that they no longer want to protect the name. I understand that the term can be very offensive, but the name should of never been trademarked in the first place if they believed it was racist (Which it is.) but since it was the team should be allowed to keep it unless the owners of the team or the NFL decided to change it.
Although it is extremely racist to name a football team after a derogatory word, it should still be protected by the US government. It is not illegal to be racist, and the name should be protected by the First Amendment, just like how the Ku Klux Klan is still protected today. They technically aren't causing physical harm to anyone so they're still protected, and the Redskins aren't either so the same should apply.
Although, I personally believe that the name Redskins is offensive and therefore should no longer be protected, but that's just my opinion. Politically speaking, the government is in the wrong on this one.
I do not agree with the government taking away the Redskins trademark. Like everyone else has been saying the name is derogatory but unfortunately it is not against the law to be racist. The name has been around for so many years the owner has said, quite a few times, that he will not change the name. People aren't making a big deal about the New York Yankees being racist. The only reason the Redskins are so controversial is because of the history regarding the name. Even if the term is racist it is the team's first amendment right to keep the name.
Everyone that has posted on this blog has pretty much summed it all up already. The team name “Redskins” is both racist and a demonstration of the First Amendment. Even though the term is clearly a derogatory term, it should still be protected under the First Amendment because even though it is morally wrong to be, it isn’t a crime to be racist. The US Patent and Trademark Office has taken away the protection to a name from a trademark that has been registered in 1967 because in more recent years, a group of US citizens, mostly Native American, have stepped out against the use of the term “Redskins”. With that all being said, the government has made an illegal action by removing the protection of the team’s name because of the First Amendment.
- Daniel Negron
Although the name of the Redskins is super racist and offensive, it isn't illegal as so many people have pointed out. Being racist isn't a crime. Changing the name means the teams freedom of speech is being violated, as the name isn't causing physical harm to anyone. The Government shouldn't have taken action, as it wasn't in their authority. It should be up to the NFL, not the government, to change the name.
-Nic Gaona
The name Redskins might be used as a racist slur, but on other occasions it isn't. The NFL team Redskins use it as a team name not as a racist slur. There should be certain occasion that you may use that word. for example I wouldn't use the word in public because I don't consider it being an appropriate word to use. The only time I would use it is if I was a fan of the Redskins. If the word Redskins doesn't comfort people then the NFL should take charge in using it because the government has no concern in this.
-Louis Bellido
Although the use of racial slurs is frowned upon, they are not illegal. Being racist is not illegal. Racial slurs are used in media frequently but, are never addressed by the government. Making the team change their name was unjust because the NFL was not committing a crime, no matter how insulting the name was. If the government had such a problem with the teams name then they should go through every song, every T.V. show, and every other thing produced by media that contains racial slurs and ethnic stereotyping and censor it.
The term redskins in itself and as it relates to the NFL team is most certainly protected under the first amendment. Although the United States does protect freedom of speech it will also choose to not validate any form of racism. Whenever the U.S faces the option to either validate racism potentially in some form or to air on the side of caution given our nations history it will choose to go with airing on the side of caution. They in essence say we would rather have nothing to do with it. Even if it means to potentially undermine the strength of the first amendment or to just plain look the other way the U.S has been willing to do so when it comes to giving anything considered racist validation regardless of free speech . As is the case with anything having to do with racism I am opposed to validating it in anyway. I would agree with the U.S Patent and Trademark Offices decision to rescind the trademark, because any country with as large of a sphere of influence as the U.S should definitely not protect a symbol and term of racism in any fashion and is something that would be taking the world ,socially, steps in the wrong direction.
-Ugonna Chukwu
The Redskins football team name should be protected by the government even though it is seen as a racist term, however you can see the reasons why the government joined in. This story has received a lot of traction recently even though the Redskins have been around for decades and many people have looked not only at the NFL for a name change but to the government as well. The government has stripped the Redskins of their trademark in hopes of forcing a move by the Redskins team owner even though he has every right for his team to have the name Redskins. The loss of revenue that tthey may experience will be distributed between 31 of the 32 teams and they will also pressure the Redskins to change their name (all NFL teams share merchandise revenue except the Cowboys). The name is racist and cannot be allowed to prosper however, it is out of bounds for the government to get involved in. Looking at both sides, this is not an entirely constitutional action, however for many it is the correct decision.
I have had many conversations debating on what the Washington football franchise should do concerning the team's name. As Mr. Castro said, it is basically the equivilant of a team being called the Alabama Niggers or the San Francisco Japs. It is a derogatory and racist term used for Native Americans that should be changed immeadiately. But it is only frowned upon socially; being racist is not illegal. This problem can be fixed by simply changing the team name, simple as that. If the government is going to enforce this on the Redskins, might as well go after other professional sports teams that have a derogatory term too, as Markos said.
-Evan Conry
Sure, “Redskins” is a derogatory term, but then again, being racist isn’t a crime. The government shouldn’t interfere with the name since they have a right to keep the name. Just because the US Patent and Trademark Office declared that “Redskins” is racist, does it really mean that it’s a crime? They’re taking away their freedom of speech, really. Plus, aren’t there more teams with derogatory meanings as well? Why isn’t the US Patent and Trademark Office do the dame with other teams?
I think if it’s such a really big problem for everyone, the NFL should decide do something about it or not, and leave the government out of it.
-Pammela Wilson
Being racist isn't a crime, therefore the Redskin name should be protected by the First Amendment. Like Ed stated previously, it should be up to the NFL to take action upon derogatory names, not the government. The groups who are being negatively impacted by it should be taking against the NFL directly and have them be against derogatory names to clear up other discriminatory names, such as the Yankees as Ed previously mentioned. Without a doubt there are many different forms of racism overall, but the people should remember that they should not rely on the government to change things that are offensive to them. The government has one purpose, and thats to provide law and order as well as certain freedoms.
- Juan Chavez
The federal government didn't have the right to rescind the title. Although it can be viewed at an issue that the government should be involved with, it goes much deeper as an issue of freedom of speech. Even with this being said the incident shouldn't have fallen into the hands of the government. There are more important things that they should be focusing on. Some will argue that the team name is highly offensive, but again this falls into the issue of freedom of speech.
I understand that the name "redskins" is a derogatory term and has been used offensively throughout history, but why will the US Patent and Trademark Office protect other sports names such as the Atlanta Braves or the Kansas City Chiefs? After being the team's trademark for so many years, why now is it recently not being protected by our government? In all honesty, I do not believe that the Washington Redskins should be forced to change their name. Not only does it remove the team's freedom of speech, but goes against our First Amendment. As upsetting as it may be, racism is not a crime. For those who find the team name offensive can simply not support the team. As Steven said, there are far more important and bigger problems going on in our country that the government should be focusing on.
-Drew Valadez
The term "Redskins" is definitely racist, but it isn't illegal to be racist because like the First Amendment states it's freedom of speech. But like Louis and Ed said the term "Redskin" is being used as a team name and a slogan and it should be to the NFL to take action upon those names. In a way the government is and isn't involved. Like any other race though would feel disrespected with such a strong term like that. Now a days many people use the saying "nigga" and there's many African Americans that don't like that at all or let alone call them a n*****. I don't think the NFL organization would also use a team name like that if they were trying to be racist. Many native american's feel disrespected still with that team name and want it to removed and changed to something else. I don't think the federal government had the right to rescind the trademark even though the term itself is racist towards Native Americans.
As terrible as it sounds, the term Redskins in reference to the NFL team should be protected by the US government. Although it is incredibly racist, the first amendment does not say, "freedom of speech as long as it's not racist." The government is supposed to do not only what is best for the people but what the people want. If people wanted the incredibly racist name of the team to change, they would boycott the team. The Redskins may still have to change their name but it should not be forced by the government.
Also I was out of town the 19-29 which is why that was posted so late.
The term "Redskins" can be considered racist and offensive to certain people, but why all of a sudden is it brought up now? This has been the name of a football team for years and now it becomes a problem. All sports have their freedom to name their team because it's their team. You are never going to keep everyone happy. In this case the government should still protect it because the team's name is protected under the First Amendment. I know it is considered racist, but the "Redskins" isn't the only racist thing going on right now. Maybe even the government is being racist in focusing just on the "Redskins" and not addressing bigger racism problems going on today.
Yes the term Redskins is racist but just like Mia and others stated it isn't illegal to be racist because the First Amendment protects freedom of speech. Therefore I do not think the government has the right to change the name of the team because I feel it just takes away from the feel for supporters of the team just like the 49ers stadium being in Santa Clara, now we have to call them the Santa Clara 49ers rather than the San Francisco 49ers? It doesn't feel right. I just feel that the people should have the full and final say. -Yadira Frutos
The term redskin is racist and freedom of speech only protects people as long as it doesn't infringe on anyone else. We can't just say whatever we want to say and insult people just because we have freedom of speech, we live in a society and if we want to live in peace and not cause fury, we have to be careful of what we say. I personally believe that if the term red skin or any other name offends anyone or any race it should be changed. And as Ed said the term yankees should be changed too because it can be offensive in some ways to some people.
The term “Redskins” is indeed racist for its offensive effect towards a group of people. However, it isn’t illegal to be racist. Under the First Amendment, our rights to freely speak is protected. With that being said, I believe their name shouldn’t be tampered with and be left alone. Although I do agree with the US Patent and Trademark Office with their decision to no longer protect the title of “Redskins” anymore. However, if it really did upset the public, matters should have been told to the football and have them resolve it, rather than the government. Although the term is highly offensive to a group of individuals, it should be dealt with from the root of the source.
-Melvin Chu
The origin of the name "Redskins" was givin by the settlers that first settled in America and found Natie American. The title name of "Redskins" is indeed racist and derogative but unfortunately racism can not be a crime unless it is breaking the law. The professional team of Washington has the right to keep their name because the first amendment protects it. I also think the owner of the team not the government, if they want to change the name they can even though the meaning is negative.
-David Awolowo
I do not believe that the government should protect the name "Redskins" because it is in fact racist and very offensive to the fellow Native Americans who are still living in this nation today. Although some people in this nation don't mind the name but I'm pretty sure they would mind the Oakland Niggers, San Francisco Wetbacks, New Jersey Greaseballs and etc. Ed also made a good point about the New York Yankees. Given the fact that Native Americans have endured so much hardship for many years after the first European settlers came to America makes it even more understandable on why they disapprove of the name. I don't consider the name a free of speech given the fact that it has cause not only much controversy but much disrespect to some of the nation's very own citizens. I do agree that if people were really bothered by the name then they would be the ones to stop showing any support towards the team since in the end its all about product demand. The more people support and continue buying "Redskins" products the more they'll ignore the issue.
-Sabrina Vargas (Out of the country)
The Redskins name might be offensive toward some people,but I don't think it should be change because it has had that name for a long time now, if society wasn't having problems back then why are they having them now? Plus why not change the name of other teams or companies like the one of "United Negro College Funds" to me that sounds offensive since the word "negro" has always been a derrogatory term and racist to African Americans.
-Miriam Juarez
I believe the whole issue is being blown out of proportion. Yes, as everyone has stated, the name is a very racist term that shouldn't be used as a team name. But there are so many other examples of this, one that comes to mind is the yankees. There were no problems when both teams were founded and given those names that the meanings have been void and at this point, free speech. It's the name of a team, it's not like they're attacking the native americans directly. Which means it is up to the owner to decide if he wants to change his derogatory team name or not.
-Christian Trujano
It It is the owner of the Redskins choice to decide to change the name of his team or not. The title "Redskins" may be racist, but it is the owners right to name his team what he wants. If the US Patent and Trademark Office chooses to no longer protect the Redskins, then they should also do the same for all other titles that are perceived racist. Why after so many years did the US government decide to bring this up and try to do this now, and why did they target the Redskins? What about the Saints and the Indians, for example? Isn't that discriminating against Catholic Churches and, well, Indians?
- Keilah Nijmeh
Like all the previous answers have started, I do believe that the term "redskin" is racist. But naming a team something racist is like telling someone that they should die, It's not illegal, It's ethically wrong. The Redskins were founded in 1932, even in that time the "N" word was used guilt free in most places so at the time naming a football team "The Redskins" didn't seem to be offensive at all. The NFL has 100% right to name there team "The Redskins", there is nothing illegal about it at all. They aren't threatening Native Americans so in the end it just comes down to the matter of ethics. We are well into the 21st century, people are sensitive, people are insensitive, people are open minded, people are ignorant. From what I have observed it comes down to pleasing the masses.
~Jack Molmud
I agree with my classmates that the term "Redskins" is racist but, it is not against the law. The term Redskin was used to describe Native Americans for many centuries. Even during the Civil Rights movement, people didn't consider changing the name. Congress didn't consider changing it either until recently. At the time they clearly did not consider the name "Redskins" racist and it did not violate the First Amendment. Freedom of speech is universal and applies to all human beings. Why choose to consider the term racist now? The team was created in 1932. 1932 was a time period of open racism and yet the term withstood time. Like I stated before, the term is clearly racist but it is not violating the First Amendment. There is no solid reason to change the team name.
I understand why people are upset. The term "Redskins" is used very nonchalantly and takes what happened to their people very lightly. It is a racist slang term. That being said, the name should be protected under federal law. It is freedom of speech. It's not attacking or hurting anyone. It's just an ugly hateful term that an NFL team uses. If they are forced to remove their name then it can serve as an excuse to go further and eventually censor everyone.
The "Redskins" name is protected under the First Amendment and I have a big issue with the government making actions that are unconstitutional. Though the name is racist, it is not the government's place to decide if its use should be continued. I'm sure the franchise realizes that there would most likely be a dominantly negative reaction among their fan base if they were to change their name. If their fans aren't supporting them through ticket and merchandise purchases then that means less income for the team. It all boils down to the dollar at the end of the day which I think is why the name hasn't been changed through the course of the team's long history.
Post a Comment