The Instigator
Gmanofsteel
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Golfer16
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should the government get involved by saying the Washington Redskins name is "racist"?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/17/2015 Category: Sports
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 319 times Debate No: 77779
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Gmanofsteel

Con

The government should have nothing to do with this. point blank
Golfer16

Pro

Hello!
For my first round i will just say best of luck!

Enjoy :)

Please state your arguments!
Debate Round No. 1
Gmanofsteel

Con

Ok the government should have nothing to do with a professional football team! Just point blank, I mean seriously don't they have other people to bother. Yes I understand it all goes back to heritage and blah, blah,, but the name is not racist. No part of it is, I mean if it were the whit skins or black skins then it would be racist, but it's not. If u say that Redskins are racist then u say Chiefs, Indians, and Black hawks would be too. Why don't they say anything about those teams?? The main point of this is there name is not racist. Point Blank!
Golfer16

Pro

Hello!
First off I would like us to look up the definition of the word "Redskins"
Redskin in an American English dictionary is a slang word for a native american tribe, also defined with additional meanings as: "usually offensive", "disparaging", "insulting", and "taboo". Englishmen also used this word to define the skin color.

The reason the Chiefs,Indians, and Blackhawks aren't racist is because these are tribes. Not skin color. Redskin directly refers to skin color, leading to racism.

For example:
Say a sports team would want to be called the N-word, and they said it wasn't racist because there were teams named after black gangs and they are both connected since they both involved blacks. Would that be ok? Because if you put our situation next to this example it correlates directly.

I would like to ask my opponent to please explain why redskins isn't defined as "racist."
I would also ask my opponent to rebut my example if possible.
Debate Round No. 2
Gmanofsteel

Con

Ok the Englishmen were not the first ones to use the term. It was the native Americans themselves that used it to separate themselves from the English and then France found out they were using it and they just continued to call them that. Now when everyone makes comparisons or "what if's" that's when people start to question, but this has nothing to do with blacks or whites.

Now if we use something like the gay Jews in Germany then yeah it will be racist, I'll even admit it, but the Redskins name was dedicated to the players who were American Indians who had played for the football team. Now my main point to this argument is the fact that the name is not racist. The reason why I say this is because it's not, it's part of history just like our confederate flag was part of history, it's to honor Native Americans not bring them down.

The government however need to just stay out of it, they should have nothing to do with a professional football team that has a losing record. I mean if you want to change it at least let them start winning before you start scolding. They do need to keep there nose out of it because all they care about is race these days. Then if one person says there offended by it then they say yeah let's change the name that'll solve the problem. Everyone is entitled to there opinion here so best of luck to you and nice job getting your facts off of Wikipedia.
Golfer16

Pro

Golfer16 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.