• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Judge ends attempt to ban Indians name, logo before ALCS game

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
S

Shiloh Raven

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2016
12,509
11,491
Texas
✟243,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

I could not agree more. I truly appreciate your support. Thank you. I wish I encountered more Christians who publicly take a stand on this native issue like you have. I think that would be a sincere testament to the faith they profess. Anyway, I came across this article during another search online keeping up to date with the Indian mascot issue and other native issues.

United Church of Christ, United Church of Canada tell baseball fans 'Just Call Them Cleveland'
 
Upvote 0
S

Shiloh Raven

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2016
12,509
11,491
Texas
✟243,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Excerpted from the article: It’s time for Major League Baseball to take a stand on Chief Wahoo

The Cleveland Indians are in the World Series. Come Tuesday they will be on baseball’s biggest stage — an international stage — for the first time in 19 years. In honor of this occasion, I’d like to know a couple of things:

  • Does Major League Baseball believe that Chief Wahoo is a racist caricature?
  • If not, why not?
  • If so, does Major League Baseball think it appropriate for a club to have a racist caricature as its logo?
  • If Wahoo is a racist caricature and if it’s inappropriate for a club to have a racist caricature as a logo what, if anything, does MLB plan to do about Chief Wahoo?
 
Upvote 0

bill5

Well-Known Member
Jul 30, 2011
6,091
2,195
✟70,699.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
expos4ever said:
Let me guess, Trump for President?
Click to expand...
Let me guess, ignorant (and as pointed out, irrelevant) labeling?

Funny I still haven't heard a single peep of anyone (anywhere) complaining about any white "racist" mascots.

Also interesting how Cleveland's mascot name and logo have been around for a REAL long time and only now is it suddenly so terrible. I guess if they were still a lousy team it'd be OK.

All hail 21st century logic!
 
Upvote 0
S

Shiloh Raven

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2016
12,509
11,491
Texas
✟243,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Actually, there have been protests against Chief Wahoo and other Indian mascots for many years. It is not a new fight. For example, Russell Means, former leader of the American Indian Movement, sued the Cleveland Indians in court in 1972.
 
Upvote 0
S

Shiloh Raven

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2016
12,509
11,491
Texas
✟243,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well, we do have the internet and social media now. I have been involved in this fight for a little over 20 years. I know the American Indian Movement has been fighting against the use of Indian mascots for many years too. There are now newer organizations like Not Your Mascot, Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry (EONM), and also Native Lives Matter.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

WolfGate

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Jun 14, 2004
4,206
2,131
South Carolina
✟555,088.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I guess I'm a wishy-washy flip-flopper on this issue. I totally understand why a group that was oppressed so heavily for so long and is still feeling the effects would not want caricatures of their culture being used. Chief Wahoo, Chief Noc-A-Homa, Red Skins as a name - I appreciate how those can be perceived negatively by Native Americans and do think teams should change those.

On the other hand, if the mascot is respectfully focused on the strengths of a people group and respectfully presents those, I don't believe there should be a concern. IMHO, Florida State Seminoles do a good job of that. The final step if you carry banning that to it's logical conclusion is that no people group could be used as a mascot if anyone in the group could be offended. No Celtics, Patriots, Tarheels, Canadians, Senators, Rangers, Islanders, Canucks, Yankees, Mariners, Pirates, Brewers, Padres, Steelers, Texans... Some of those use caricatures as well, but the groups as a whole, even if there was oppression (Celtics) no longer feel the effects of the oppression.
 
Reactions: expos4ever
Upvote 0
S

Shiloh Raven

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2016
12,509
11,491
Texas
✟243,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
expos4ever said:
Fair point - all such mascots should go.
Click to expand...

I agree. I am of the opinion that people, no matter who they are, are human beings and not mascots for American sports entertainment. I am against the use of any people, Native American or not, being depicted by racial caricatures and exploited for sports entertainment and monetary gain. As I said in my first post, Native culture is not for sale. Native culture is not a trend to be exploited for the pleasure of American sports fans. Native Americans have been marginalized and native culture has been exploited long enough in this country. And as I also pointed out in my first post, multiple psychological studies have proven Indian mascots are harmful to native youth and perpetuates racism and discrimination against native youth and adults.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register