Chewey Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 I am still having trouble understanding how a "Sacred Ceremony" that took place on Standing Rock, is not recognized as a sacred ceremony by Standing Rock. I think we lost a lot of credibility on that issue by the Elders at Standing Rock. It was and is a religious ceremony. Native Americans do not pull out the pipe "just for show." Look at the history behind Pipestone, MN for a primer. By analogy, anyone can choose to violate any one of the Ten Commandments. Just because one or chooses to do so does not make the choice "right" or make the particular commandment any less valid or sacred. The Pope could disregard any part of Catholic orthodoxy, as established through the Magisterium, but that would not make the Pope's choice right or valid. To say that the Tribal Council has not done this or that only demonstrates an acceptance of such a counterfeit position. There is a lot more spirituality in the Native American tradition than in the European tradition. Anything done with the Pipe has considerable spiritual significance and is permanent and binding. If JTA and 7 or 8 others of his ilk on the SR tribal council choose not to respect that, they may do so but that does not mean that what they are doing is valid. Anything done pursuant to the Pipe constitutes a truism for time immemorial, supposedly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 It was and is a religious ceremony. Native Americans do not pull out the pipe "just for show." Look at the history behind Pipestone, MN for a primer. By analogy, anyone can choose to violate any one of the Ten Commandments. Just because one or chooses to do so does not make the choice "right" or make the particular commandment any less valid or sacred. The Pope could disregard any part of Catholic orthodoxy, as established through the Magisterium, but that would not make the Pope's choice right or valid. To say that the Tribal Council has not done this or that only demonstrates an acceptance of such a counterfeit position. There is a lot more spirituality in the Native American tradition than in the European tradition. Anything done with the Pipe has considerable spiritual significance and is permanent and binding. If JTA and 7 or 8 others of his ilk on the SR tribal council choose not to respect that, they may do so but that does not mean that what they are doing is valid. Anything done pursuant to the Pipe constitutes a truism for time immemorial, supposedly. You're probably right about the pipe ceremony. Unfortunately, the NCAA doesn't care. That's all that matters in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 For lack of a better place to put this... http://www.inforum.c...460/group/News/ The sixth proposed measure would change the North Dakota Constitution to require that the University of North Dakota's sports teams be known as the Fighting Sioux. In June, 67 percent of North Dakota voters approved an initiative that allows UND to retire the nickname, which the NCAA considers demeaning to American Indians. Sean Johnson, a nickname supporter, said the constitutional amendment would prevent UND from permanently severing the link to its nickname. "This is a different ballot measure ... It doesn't require the sports teams at UND to do anything. They don't have to wear the logo, they don't have to use the name," Johnson said Wednesday. No decision has been made about whether to submit the Fighting Sioux amendment in time for the November election, or target the June 2014 primary, which is the next scheduled statewide election. Amendment supporters have until Dec. 12 to turn in their petitions. "We haven't decided which election we want to have the initiated measure to be a part of," Johnson said. "We're still weighing the options, and keeping those options open." Maybe I have been living under a rock, but I don't know that I have ever heard the bolded part before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 For lack of a better place to put this... http://www.inforum.c...460/group/News/ Maybe I have been living under a rock, but I don't know that I have ever heard the bolded part before. If the proposed measure "would change the North Dakota Constitution to require that the University of North Dakota's sports teams be known as the Fighting Sioux" how can Johnson say that it doesn't require the sports teams at UND to wear the logo or use the name? So UND's spots teams will be known as the Fighting Sioux but won't wear and logo or use the name? So basically the official unofficial name and logo? What is the point of that? To ensure that UND does not completely forget about the name and logo and wipe it from its history? No chance that UND will do that. this measure is a waste of time. If it was on the ballot this Novemember, it micht get beaten 90/10. Which is exactly why they are debating putting it on the ballot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 If the proposed measure "would change the North Dakota Constitution to require that the University of North Dakota's sports teams be known as the Fighting Sioux" how can Johnson say that it doesn't require the sports teams at UND to wear the logo or use the name? So UND's spots teams will be known as the Fighting Sioux but won't wear and logo or use the name? So basically the official unofficial name and logo? What is the point of that? To ensure that UND does not completely forget about the name and logo and wipe it from its history? No chance that UND will do that. this measure is a waste of time. If it was on the ballot this Novemember, it micht get beaten 90/10. Which is exactly why they are debating putting it on the ballot. This reminds me of the UND Flickertails. It was their name but unoffical, they didn't wear any jerseys with the name Flickertails only Nodaks, and there was no Flickertail logo. So what's the point of the change in the constitution besides a waste of time and something more to talk about. People want this issue to go away and until the NCAA comes out and says we are repealing the NA nickname policy all schools can return to their former name....I don't want to relive this issue EVER!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 This reminds me of the UND Flickertails. It was their name but unoffical, they didn't wear any jerseys with the name Flickertails only Nodaks, and there was no Flickertail logo. So what's the point of the change in the constitution besides a waste of time and something more to talk about. People want this issue to go away and until the NCAA comes out and says we are repealing the NA nickname policy all schools can return to their former name....I don't want to relive this issue EVER!!! I would believe that if they were foolish enough to waste their time, money and energy and put it on the ballot it would lose by at least a 60% margin. North Dakotans are finished with this issue. It's over. Time to move on. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 If the proposed measure "would change the North Dakota Constitution to require that the University of North Dakota's sports teams be known as the Fighting Sioux" how can Johnson say that it doesn't require the sports teams at UND to wear the logo or use the name? So UND's spots teams will be known as the Fighting Sioux but won't wear and logo or use the name? So basically the official unofficial name and logo? What is the point of that? To ensure that UND does not completely forget about the name and logo and wipe it from its history? No chance that UND will do that. this measure is a waste of time. If it was on the ballot this Novemember, it micht get beaten 90/10. Which is exactly why they are debating putting it on the ballot. You'll have to excuse Sean, He's as thick-headed and obtuse now as he was when he was on campus. And I really doubt the NC$$ would give UND any slack on that angle either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 You'll have to excuse Sean, He's as thick-headed and obtuse now as he was when he was on campus. And I really doubt the NC$$ would give UND any slack on that angle either. Maybe he thinks UND can use the Indian head hockey jerseys in a throwback game. I don't think the NCAA would agree to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.