re: Why are the Redskins getting so much heat?

quote:

---

There is no moral reason to campaign to keep the name

---

I'm not even sure why you think that's a criteria that must be met. Snyder's is a financial one. Moreover, how you can say there isn't a moral reason without viewing morals as a specifically defined code with factual basis. People have different moral codes. Some people do think it is a big deal. I don't and I don't have a moral justification to "fight" not am I fighting; however if I wanted to I can do so without moral justification. Lastly, while I find the idea of opposing the name that is racist to be morally justifiable, I (and many others-a majority of others) don't think it's racist which would mean I don't find your reason to be morally just.

You're a new breed - a dictionary thumper. Praise be to oxford.

Here's the thing: the term Redskins is not inherently offensive. Yes, some people take offense to it. But it is a neutral physical description. Have we got to the point where describing someones physical appearance, or acknowledging physical appearance is negative and offensive?

Remove all the perceptions youve been told you should have. Is calling someone a description based on their skin (redskin) different than hair (brunette) or height (the Giants) or eye color (old blue eyes)? No its not. Redskin doesnt imply anything negative.

quote:

---

you really haven't provided any valuable material.

---

You've given nothing but your high horse opinion. People have linked stories of native American high schools fighting to keep the name redskins as their mascot. You've shown where one politically motivated group has come out against it.