hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Please explain to me why we have to get rid of our names cause the natives say its offensive but yet watching the ND class B tourney and seeing the Four Winds INDIANS? Double standard? Where were the protesters? Oh but Cleveland can't be the Indians. http://www.fourwinds.k12.nd.us/education/s...php?sectionid=2 Is this logo acceptable to the Native American people? Maybe the Sioux should change their name to the Indians and have this logo?? Works for Four Winds If you cannot figure that out for yourself you need to turn your hood around so the eyeholes are in the front. A good new name for the UND teams would be the Fighting Racists or the Fighting Klan.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Just tell your son that if you complain and are in the total minority you can get your way. There is no majority rule when it comes to PC. Those people should be on a deserted island somewhere where they can just bitch to each other and no one would care. The majority also said it was ok to have slaves.
darell1976 Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 The majority also said it was ok to have slaves. Actually the minority said it was okay to have slaves..remember the civil war?? If majority ruled on slavery Abe Lincoln would have agreed that slavery was okay. Open a history book.
darell1976 Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 If you cannot figure that out for yourself you need to turn your hood around so the eyeholes are in the front. A good new name for the UND teams would be the Fighting Racists or the Fighting Klan. Fighting Klan??? So all Indian nicknames are racists??? Seminoles, Utes, Chippewas? So you drive up to Belcourt, ND and tell them they are racists cause they have an Indian nickname, and see what they say to you.
dakotadan Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 The majority also said it was ok to have slaves. A majority of african americans said it was okay to have slaves? I didn't know that. You learn something new every day. I did know, however, that a majority of american indians have said that it is okay for sports teams to use names and logos such as UND's. Even those in North Dakota.
redwing77 Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 I did know, however, that a majority of american indians have said that it is okay for sports teams to use names and logos such as UND's. Even those in North Dakota. Who cares what that majority thinks! They don't call them the "ignorant masses" for nothing. Everyone who has been on this board for the past 5 years know that all "true" Native Americans are against the nickname. All those who do not care or are supportive of the nickname have lost their heritage or worse, "hang around the fort indians."
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Actually the minority said it was okay to have slaves..remember the civil war?? If majority ruled on slavery Abe Lincoln would have agreed that slavery was okay. Open a history book. I would suggest that you open a history book since I have a degree in history. The Civil War was not about slavery.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 The typical responce from someone who cannot form an arguement.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 A majority of african americans said it was okay to have slaves? I didn't know that. You learn something new every day. I did know, however, that a majority of american indians have said that it is okay for sports teams to use names and logos such as UND's. Even those in North Dakota. Source your arguement. African-Americans were not considered human so their opinion would not have counted.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 A majority of african americans said it was okay to have slaves? I didn't know that. You learn something new every day. I did know, however, that a majority of american indians have said that it is okay for sports teams to use names and logos such as UND's. Even those in North Dakota. Why do you only capitalize UND and North Dakota and not African-Americans or Native Americans? Are they not as worthy?
Stromer Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 I would suggest that you open a history book since I have a degree in history. The Civil War was not about slavery. It may not have been the main cause but it was an underlying factor in almost all of the issues under contention.
siouxforeverbaby Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 I would suggest that you open a history book since I have a degree in history. The Civil War was not about slavery. No, it was just one of the main causes of it because no one could agree. and African-Americans at that time did count as humans or at least 2/3's of a person. And if we are going off ceredentials, I will be qualified to teach history in about a year.
ScottM Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 The typical responce from someone who cannot form an arguement. Yeah, but at least I can SPELL. Where did you get your degree, the University of Phoenix?
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 It may not have been the main cause but it was an underlying factor in almost all of the issues under contention. Slavery had nothing to do with the cause of the Civil War. It was a war between two different cultures, an industrial culture and an agrarian culture.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Yeah, but at least I can SPELL. Where did you get your degree, the University of Phoenix? Actually two degrees from the University of North Dakota. I may have not spelled a word in haste but I do not wear a hood with the eyeholes turned around.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 No, it was just one of the main causes of it because no one could agree. and African-Americans at that time did count as humans or at least 2/3's of a person. And if we are going off ceredentials, I will be qualified to teach history in about a year. God help your students then.
hermit Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Who cares what that majority thinks! They don't call them the "ignorant masses" for nothing. Everyone who has been on this board for the past 5 years know that all "true" Native Americans are against the nickname. All those who do not care or are supportive of the nickname have lost their heritage or worse, "hang around the fort indians." This board is made up of the "IGNORANT masses".
Stromer Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 Slavery had nothing to do with the cause of the Civil War. It was a war between two different cultures, an industrial culture and an agrarian culture. Yes my mistake. The abolishment of slavery would not have affected the agrarian culture found in the south at all. The federal government support for the abolishment of slavery would have sat very well in a region that leaned to state rights. Hell, slavery must not have been an issue at all. The Missouri Compromise was a waste of time. Why would anyone be concerned with the makeup in congress if slavery wasn't an issue?
GDM Posted March 30, 2008 Posted March 30, 2008 This one's done folks. GDM Forums Moderator SiouxSports.com
Recommended Posts