Bill to keep Sioux nickname

[CAS4127]

Considering Solen is on their reservation, the school probably has the best argument for using that name compared to anyone else.

Also, they are a part of the NDHSAA, not the NCAA.

So tell me again why Wapeton and the Grand Spoons schools had to change their mascots, explaining in the the same sentence or post how double-standards and PC are not involved--I'm listening---------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. I could careless about the mascot thing, but could not care more about double-standards and PC--just sayin!!

[aces1180]

So tell me again why Wapeton and the Grand Spoons schools had to change their mascots, explaining in the the same sentence or post how double-standards and PC are not involved--I'm listening---------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. I could careless about the mascot thing, but could not care more about double-standards and PC--just sayin!!

I can't answer that question...Were those changes directed from the NDHSAA or some other organization/group?

[CAS4127]

I can't answer that question...Were those changes directed from the NDHSAA or some other organization/group?

It was either them or some other state "regulatory" body, much like when Minnesota schools had to do the same thing. Thankfully, more level heads prevailed in Mahnomen, MN--home of the Mahnomen Indians to this day--when the White Earth Band of Chips wrote the MSHL and told them they were honored by the name and asked that Mahnomen High be allowed to continue using it. Wow, what a concept don't you think????!!!!

[Green-N-Gold]

[QUOTE=tony;463431]backpages, I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing (just so you know)

First, Carlson's bill completely takes a vote by Standing Rock off the table.

Second, there is no legally recognized body except the tribal councils for making these kind of decisions. Moreover, suppose the vote was 60% for "Yes, I like the nickname" and 40% for "No, it must go." Looking a vote like that, wouldn't the Tribal Council be within their rights to say, "Holy cow, we're not giving our name away unconditionally when 40% of our people say no."

Bottom line is that there is no reason that the wishes of Standing Rock's tribal council should not be acknowledged as valid as long as they are legal. The plain fact is that if the tribal population voted against the nickname and the tribal council voted for it, the nickname folks would recognize the tribal council's decision as valid and reject the popular vote. Just like they'd reject any future popular votes that went agaisnt the nickname.

The "nickname uber alles" folks will ALWAYS reject any vote or decision that they don't agree with. That's their only guiding principle.[/QUOTE]



We have a winner. It has been documented on here multiple times that only when they needed help from the Indians did nickname supporters suddenly cry that the Indians voice needs to be heard.

[Notorious]

Why does it always seem like idiots lead these campaigns...?

Not just this one, but the "voice" of so many controversial issues, generally on both sides, is typically an under-educated moron.

[CAS4127]

[QUOTE=Green-N-Gold;463463]

backpages, I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing (just so you know)

First, Carlson's bill completely takes a vote by Standing Rock off the table.

Second, there is no legally recognized body except the tribal councils for making these kind of decisions. Moreover, suppose the vote was 60% for "Yes, I like the nickname" and 40% for "No, it must go." Looking a vote like that, wouldn't the Tribal Council be within their rights to say, "Holy cow, we're not giving our name away unconditionally when 40% of our people say no."

Bottom line is that there is no reason that the wishes of Standing Rock's tribal council should not be acknowledged as valid as long as they are legal. The plain fact is that if the tribal population voted against the nickname and the tribal council voted for it, the nickname folks would recognize the tribal council's decision as valid and reject the popular vote. Just like they'd reject any future popular votes that went agaisnt the nickname.

The "nickname uber alles" folks will ALWAYS reject any vote or decision that they don't agree with. That's their only guiding principle.[/QUOTE]



We have a winner. It has been documented on here multiple times that only when they needed help from the Indians did nickname supporters suddenly cry that the Indians voice needs to be heard.

I will switch the bolded around a little just to make a pont: It has been well documented that only when Indians needed help from non-Indians or the state or federal government did the Indians want their voice to be heard.

[aces1180]

I can see why the Redskins (Grand Forks Central), Savages (Dickinson State) and Wops (Wahpeton) are considered offensive, as that would be like calling an African-American the N-word. But I don't believe that the Satans (Devils Lake) or Sioux (UND) are derogatory. I suppose some Christians got involved with the DL name, but for some reason, they let the Demons (BHS) have a pass.

It is odd how some people decide what is OK and what is not.

Weren't they going to change the Midgets (Dickinson) nickname a few years back?

Also, I was a Mandan Brave (high school) and Chief (Legion)...Unfortunately, its only a matter of time there IMO. However, the work around there is just removing the Native American imagery and making the Braves and Chiefs firefighters or something.

[CAS4127]

I can see why the Redskins (Grand Forks Central), Savages (Dickinson State) and Wops (Wahpeton) are considered offensive, as that would be like calling an African-American the N-word. But I don't believe that the Satans (Devils Lake) or Sioux (UND) are derogatory. I suppose some Christians got involved with the DL name, but for some reason, they let the Demons (BHS) have a pass.

It is odd how some people decide what is OK and what is not.

Weren't they going to change the Midgets (Dickinson) nickname a few years back?

Some people??? Wonder who "they" are???

But the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Chicago Blackhawks (with their Who lookalike logo), etc. aren't? It's all making a lot more "sense" to me now--whoops, I meant "non-sense".

[aces1180]

Some people??? Wonder who "they" are???

But the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Chicago Blackhawks (with their Who lookalike logo), etc. aren't? It's all making a lot more "sense" to me now--whoops, I meant "non-sense".

Don't forget KC Chiefs...

I personally don't have a problem with any nicknames and I don't know why some get a pass and others don't. Its inconsistent, and you are right, full of non-sense.

[dmksioux]

Considering Solen is on their reservation, the school probably has the best argument for using that name compared to anyone else.

Also, they are a part of the NDHSAA, not the NCAA.

I realize this is the easy argument. However, when you read or hear the supposed "victims" talk/write about the UND logo, they talk about how it's offensive and doesn't portray the Native American of today. It portrays what they were and it creates a stereotype of what a Native American is. I just don't understand how the Solen Sioux logo is ok and the UND Sioux logo isn't and I never will.

This all boils down to a few PC nutjobs who were upset with Ralph and the way he went about his business. And yes, Tony is correct in that UND could have been a bit more aware about the relationship between the tribes and the school. However, it wasn't necessarily for a lack of trying on UND's part. The school did switch logos throughout the past decades and it's good they did. Sammy the Sioux was never a good idea. I will also say UND does do quite a bit for Native Americans, probably more than any other Public University, with all of the programs they offer. The one thing they did wrong, was take the name for granted. Sorry to go on a rant...this thread just opens up old wounds. The name is gone and the legislature should just let it go...