- - Tuesday, October 8, 2013

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

I certainly can see how the name might be deemed as offensive to American Indiana; no sporting team would dare to use “brownskins” or “whiteskins” as their mascot. However, as a lifelong Redskins fan and season ticket holder I can only wonder if there is a double standard at play, particularly when the debate crosses over into the political spectrum.

The origin of our 46th state’s name, Oklahoma, is derived from two Choctaw Indian words meaning “red people.” How is this not as offensive, or even more offensive, than the name Redskins? Our country would never name a state “black people” or “white people,” so why is it okay for us to call one of our great states “red people”?

If our president and other elected officials suggest that the owner of the Washington Redskins should consider changing the team’s name, those same elected officials should at least consider changing the name of our 46th state.

CHRIS HABERLIN
Richmond

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide