So now we are back to my original observation, that what I find
offensive is not what others may find offensive.  Personally, I would
rather live in a society that didn't try to paternalistically protect me
from every imaginable offense.  When we start down that road, where does
it end?  Who is to say that anyone is "right"?  Isn't everyone entitled
to their own point of view?  Do we need to sanitize everything in an
effort to not offend anyone ever?

I agree with Florida State's President, whose statement is right on
point.

A few years after my kids graduated from it, their high school changed
their athletic teams name from "Comanches" to "Bears".  The argument was
that none of the students are Comanches.  How many of them are bears?

As for the Orangemen, the Dutch settled New York (originally called New
Amsterdam), and it is that connection that is the source of the offense.
My Irish grandmother (she was a Quinn from County Armagh) told me as a
child to never never never wear orange on St. Patrick's Day, and to
avoid anyone who did!  To this day, when the Orangemen march through the
Catholic neighborhoods of Northern Ireland, there is trouble.

And finally, the term "native American" is accurately applied to anyone
who was born in the Western Hemisphere.  I am a native American, my
friend from Costa Rica is a native American, my colleague from Brazil is
a native American.


C. Spreeman



-----Original Message-----
From: - Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bob Griebel
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 11:02 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: NCAA bans Indian mascots, nicknames from postseason events

Wayne T Smith wrote:

> So ... all that rambling just so I can suggest that one man's honoring
> can be another's dishonoring.


How do we tell which one is right.?

Bob Griebel