Skip to content

Churches propose Redskins boycott

Washington Redskins v Tennessee Titans Getty Images

It’s Monday, which means that it’s time for the Washington Redskins to unveil the latest collection of unverified messages from Native Americans who made unsolicited expressions of support for owner Daniel Snyder’s October 2013 letter defending the team’s name.

And they have, with another seven of the more than 200 people who identified themselves as Native Americans or as family members of Native Americans.

But the team may want to start paying a little more attention to Sundays, not Mondays.  As explained over the weekend by Carol Morello of the Washington Post, the governing body of the United Church of Christ congregations in the Mid-Atlantic has proposed a boycott of Redskins games and products until the team changes its name and mascot.

The group covers 180 congregations and 22,000 members, and the proposal could land on the agenda of the conference’s annual meeting in June.

“We respect those who disagree with our team’s name, but we wish the United Church of Christ would listen to the voice of the overwhelming majority of Americans, including Native Americans, who support our name and understand it honors the heritage and tradition of the Native American community,” team spokesman Tony Wyllie told the Post.

The team keeps calling the support “overwhelming,” but that’s hardly the case.  In 1992, support was much closer to overwhelming, at 89 percent.  Last April, an Associated Press poll showed that it had eroded to 79 percent.

More recently, it’s down to 71 percent.

That’s not overwhelming.  And it’s continuously shrinking.  Most recently, the issue has remained periodically in the news, at varying degrees of intensity, for more than a full year.  Now that the team has joined the issue by actively and regularly defending the name, it will stay in the public eye.

Overall, the trend isn’t encouraging.  At some point, the support will move toward 50-50.  Then, those who believe the name is appropriate will be in the minority.

As conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer explained it last year, it’s part of the evolution of language.  Words that were once acceptable become, over time, inappropriate.  At some point, the consensus will be so clear that the name can’t continue that the name will change.

While that may not happen during Snyder’s tenure as owner, it eventually will.  Even if Snyder sticks to his “all caps never” vow, his team’s decision to consistently make the case for keeping the name guarantees that the issue will continue to hover over the franchise until the name inevitably changes.

Permalink 58 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Washington Redskins
58 Responses to “Churches propose Redskins boycott”
  1. crabcakesfootball says: Mar 3, 2014 10:15 AM

    CHANGE THE NAME…. oops left the caps lock on.

  2. norseyapper says: Mar 3, 2014 10:15 AM

    The United Church of Christ stands for all things liberal. They need to worry about their own true mission and leave football issues to others.
    This is purely nothing more than a publicity and PR move on their part.

  3. thevikesarebest says: Mar 3, 2014 10:19 AM

    They should boycott the slurskins for sucking so bad.

  4. jmac1013 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:21 AM

    Overall, the trend isn’t encouraging. At some point, the support will move toward 50-50. Then, those who believe the name is appropriate will be in the minority.
    ===============================
    If it’s 50-50, there isn’t a majority or a minority, correct?

  5. dirtydrynn27 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:22 AM

    Keep the name!

  6. ajgreenhof says: Mar 3, 2014 10:22 AM

    Uh-oh Redskins fans…

    It’s not going away.

  7. sc711 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:23 AM

    Over time views change, polls will continue to go down, it is inevitable.

  8. 950003cups says: Mar 3, 2014 10:24 AM

    Another crap season with RGIII and there won’t be a need for a boycott or ban. Stadium will be empty.

  9. getyourownname says: Mar 3, 2014 10:24 AM

    The Church of Competent Football demands a change, too.

  10. pabrownsfan says: Mar 3, 2014 10:25 AM

    How can you claim 71% is not overwhelming? If it were a presidential election it would be called a landslide.

  11. linemanguy74 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:26 AM

    Fighting Sioux gone,Redskins and Fighting Irish name still here, “what the hell is going on here”

  12. mshawn75 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:27 AM

    It’s Monday, which means it’s time for you to beat this “dead horse”.

  13. jolink653 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:27 AM

    You know what the worst part of this whole thing is? We as a society had taken a word that people are now insisting is equivalent to the n-word and removed the hate and negativity and, in a sense, defused the word as a racial slur. Many of the younger generations, me being part of one, had no idea that Redskins was some kind of racist slur. And now, these people with their incessant whining and complaining have restored that negativity and hate to the word. They turned it back into a slur because everyone in society is so eager to find something to be offended about. It’s really a shame what we as a country have turned into, but I really hope Snyder doesn’t back down to these people

  14. raiderufan says: Mar 3, 2014 10:28 AM

    If the goal is to eliminate hate and bigotry they may want to give the good book yet another edit….stones in glass houses…

  15. 950003cups says: Mar 3, 2014 10:29 AM

    Ban the Cleveland Browns! It’s offensive to Puerto Ricans! Airline industry is feeling hurt by the use of the NY Jets. There’s a bunch of men in Texas who ride horses who are offended by the Dallas Cowboys.

  16. thevikesarebest says: Mar 3, 2014 10:30 AM

    The Rgnoknee3-13s.how about that for a name change?

  17. redzona says: Mar 3, 2014 10:31 AM

    You said and spelled Redskins three times and I’m not offended. Now try that with the “N” word, that’s what I thought.

  18. blackqbwhiterb says: Mar 3, 2014 10:31 AM

    The NFL used to be about football. Now it’s a platform for liberal political activism. This kind of stuff will only serve to further compel White Honkies to support the Redskins in defiance of the PC police

  19. rufusporter says: Mar 3, 2014 10:33 AM

    Everyone should just refer to them as the Washington ‘Racists’ from now on. It has a ring to it. And it would be fun to hear ‘And the Racists lose again’ every Sunday.

  20. hendawg21 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:38 AM

    Oh please the folks attending games ON SUNDAY don’t attend that church more than likely and could care less…we’re all offended by something so get over it. Maybe their argument would seem more legit if they included all sports teams names and mascots and names. Again i’m of Cherokee, Blackfoot bloodlines and I find this totally stupid…

  21. jimnaizeeum says: Mar 3, 2014 10:39 AM

    Maybe Snyder could change it to Shylocks or JAP’s, of course he may think having a team named after a slur of his heritage is offensive.

  22. FinFan68 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:40 AM

    Jolink653 I agree with your post with one exception: the word was never really used as a slur. The perpetually offended believe if it sounds offensive then it must be offensive. I have asked many times on this site for a single credible citing of the word being used that way… Never got one. Not one instance from the oneida gang of being called that or any historical reference whatsoever.

  23. nfl4days says: Mar 3, 2014 10:42 AM

    The name is gonna change. Deal with it.

  24. fwippel says: Mar 3, 2014 10:47 AM

    A boycott? That is very funny.

    Does these people realize that there is a VERY LONG waiting list to become a Redskins season ticket holder? Does these people have any idea of just how popular this team has been, despite their lack of success since Joe Gibbs left the first time?

    This drive to force Snyder to change the Redskins name is driven completely by the media. The common NFL fan doesn’t care about it, and doesn’t take it as a slur. Of course, that’s what upsets the media so much, and it’s one of the reasons why the elitists who run most media outlets look down their noses at us Joe Sixpacks.

  25. juanweiner says: Mar 3, 2014 10:50 AM

    When the N-WORD is so common ON THE PLAYING field yet no one protests it. Yeah the NFL wants it to stop, good luck with that.

  26. losntina69 says: Mar 3, 2014 10:50 AM

    Yup change the redskins name…after that they should change Koons dealership and Spic and Span cleaning solution. Somehow those other two names are okay to be used.

  27. jimnaizeeum says: Mar 3, 2014 10:52 AM

    FinFan68 says:
    the word was never really used as a slur. The perpetually offended believe if it sounds offensive then it must be offensive. I have asked many times on this site for a single credible citing of the word being used that way… Never got one.

    Ok, here you go, from a few dictionaries:

    red·skin
    [red-skin]
    noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
    a North American Indian.

    Definition of REDSKIN
    usually offensive
    : american indian

    redskin
    noun [C] /ˈred.skɪn/ offensive
    › old-fashioned for a Native American

  28. jimmyt says: Mar 3, 2014 10:53 AM

    If the libs have their way, soon, our kids will no longer have any memories of Native Americans or their culture.

  29. imaduffer says: Mar 3, 2014 10:57 AM

    There for a minute I thought Charles Krauthammer was talking about Fox and news.

  30. giantsninerswarriors says: Mar 3, 2014 11:03 AM

    As a general rule, if an overwhelming majority of Americans are in support of something, then it’s probably completely ridiculous.

  31. themightywhitey says: Mar 3, 2014 11:09 AM

    If the conservatives have their way, soon, our kids will no longer have any memories of Native Americans or their culture.

  32. rc33 says: Mar 3, 2014 11:10 AM

    Important that you noted Krauthammer was a Conservative. The story would’ve fallen apart otherwise.

  33. v2787 says: Mar 3, 2014 11:23 AM

    Yeah, the author shouldn’t have noted that Krauthammer was a conservative. Assclown would’ve been more accurate.

  34. thedudesnotin says: Mar 3, 2014 11:23 AM

    Krauthammer – now there’s a racist word in there somewhere…

  35. pourman says: Mar 3, 2014 11:42 AM

    Why doesn’t the government just appropriate their stadium and move them to a really crappy one in the west?

  36. jmac1013 says: Mar 3, 2014 11:44 AM

    FinFan68 says:
    Mar 3, 2014 10:40 AM
    Jolink653 I agree with your post with one exception: the word was never really used as a slur. The perpetually offended believe if it sounds offensive then it must be offensive. I have asked many times on this site for a single credible citing of the word being used that way… Never got one. Not one instance from the oneida gang of being called that or any historical reference whatsoever.
    ================================
    Wow, finally someone who gets it. See my post with a link to the white paper (is that racist?) on the entomology of the term Redskin.

  37. qwantumfysics says: Mar 3, 2014 11:45 AM

    The group covers 180 congregations and 22,000 members…..

    probably 1/3 of whom are active members (100% of those will die of old age in 5 years) Churches / religion are losing members by the 100s of thousands….nobody cares what they have to say.

  38. pilonflats says: Mar 3, 2014 11:55 AM

    Krauthammer is a good man – take a look at his life story

  39. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: Mar 3, 2014 11:57 AM

    1) 71% is actually pretty strong.

    2) The only reason the topic doesn’t die is because you won’t let it rest!

    3) I just read an article (PFT) where Richard Sherman is telling us he hears the n-word used on almost every series. So much for the evolution of language theory.

  40. greysolon says: Mar 3, 2014 12:04 PM

    71% is not overwhelming?? And that is Native Americans!

    If there were 71% of people in support of some gay issue you’d call it the landslide of the century.

  41. skinsfolife says: Mar 3, 2014 12:14 PM

    With a huge Redskins fan winning the Academy Award there is no way in hell they change the name now. Get down off your soap box Mike replace it with a six foot ladder so you can actually look most men in the eye.

  42. tformation says: Mar 3, 2014 12:22 PM

    Boycotts don’t work. Especially something with as high demand as the Redskins football team. They still have a waiting list for season tickets, right?

    My advice to Snyder is to simply ignore this kind of silliness and the silly bloggers who blog about it.

    Keep the name.

  43. craigkintexas says: Mar 3, 2014 12:34 PM

    Oh gosh! 71% of the respondents found the name to be not offensive…….the sky is falling. Truth be known it probably is closer to the 79% range as Public Policy Polling is a far left Soros funded outfit.

  44. eagles512 says: Mar 3, 2014 12:47 PM

    What a joke. Leave it be

  45. mutohasaposse says: Mar 3, 2014 12:50 PM

    Dumbest boycott ever. Fans of the team wouldn’t be part of it so who isn’t going to buying merchandise or watching the game? People who already weren’t.

    And of course of the 29% that were offended, 95% were white liberals who believe, “These savages aren’t smart enough to know the name is demeaning!” Liberals, the encouraged racism.

  46. rjwill says: Mar 3, 2014 12:50 PM

    I can understand wanting to keep things due to tradition but as a pure business move I don’t understand why Snyder would resist this so much… think of all the new jerseys, hats, shirts, etc that would be bought.

  47. grumpyoleman says: Mar 3, 2014 1:05 PM

    Since when isn’t 71% over-whelming?

  48. princessmorbucks says: Mar 3, 2014 1:35 PM

    #WHINERS

  49. theheyseed says: Mar 3, 2014 1:40 PM

    I don’t think he should, but Snyder will change the name. He will keep this story alive (any publicity is good publicity) until it gets real heated. Then he will get the NFL to pay/or comp him for “doing what is good for the league” probably a few million and maybe some kind of pick package etc. Then the team will make a big deal about choosing a new name/mascot/logo which will be national news. More free publicity. Then they will blitz the market with all the new hats, shirts and assorted crap. Us long time fans won’t be happy but Snyder will be richer and hope that his reputation will get a boost from dirt bag to OK.

  50. haytammy says: Mar 3, 2014 1:49 PM

    Just change the darn name…I’m tired of this stuff lol

  51. FinFan68 says: Mar 3, 2014 3:12 PM

    jmac1013 says:
    Mar 3, 2014 11:44 AM
    FinFan68 says:
    Mar 3, 2014 10:40 AM
    Jolink653 I agree with your post with one exception: the word was never really used as a slur. The perpetually offended believe if it sounds offensive then it must be offensive. I have asked many times on this site for a single credible citing of the word being used that way… Never got one. Not one instance from the oneida gang of being called that or any historical reference whatsoever.
    ================================
    Wow, finally someone who gets it. See my post with a link to the white paper (is that racist?) on the entomology of the term Redskin.\
    ~~~~~~~~~~~
    I assume you mean the one by Ives Goddard (“I Am A Redskin”). He is/was curator emeritus in the Department of Anthropology of the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution. He is widely considered the leading expert on the Algonquian languages and the larger Algic language family. I have tried to post excerpts from that but they never seem to get past the censors with opposing views.

  52. shlort says: Mar 3, 2014 4:52 PM

    71% +/- 3 or 4 % is pretty much overwhelming. I guess it depends on what side of the argument a person is on. If it were 51% wanting the name changed, it would be an overwhelming majority wanting it changed.

    Reality is that the PC situation in this country is using a tactic where people are being pressured into changing their opinion. This is done by calling people racists, bigots and other words associated with hate. No one likes to be labeled that way, and a certain amount of people will change their view rather than be under scrutiny for being in a group the PC crowd has labeled as haters.

    It is just the beginning, folks. This tactic is being used with great success and the government is not the one doing the pressuring. Next thing you know, we will be giving up our constitutional rights willingly (probably demanding we lose our rights), as the PC crowd (basically the progressives) tells people that they hate something/some group if they don’t support the progtressive cause.

    This won’t get posted, it goes against the acceptable way of thinking.

  53. jbird056719 says: Mar 3, 2014 6:32 PM

    PFT – you post material that has a certain political bent. However, you rarely allow replies that take you to task and point out your liberal views. I truly love the site and news and rumors. But,like many on here, hate the politics. Today was a great day for you – keep the PC crap out of it.

  54. FinFan68 says: Mar 3, 2014 7:32 PM

    shlort,
    BINGO!
    +1oo
    Actually on your point of willingly giving up rights, everyone who uses a smart phone has basically done that already. Look at the permissions you have to give some of the apps. Most just click OK and press on with their immediate gratification.

  55. voight444 says: Mar 3, 2014 8:58 PM

    Mr. Snyder, it’s your business and what you name it is your business. you can name it what you want. They can’t bully you into changing. Don’t,let them. You have too big a fan base to worry about these nutty people. Political correct crap makes me sick. let them whine until they can’t whine any more. what are the liberals gonna do …..they gonna. LEt them try to boycott your sponsors….good,luck with that won’t work either……give,ups libs…….you bunch of stupid people….let’s worry about getting our country back in order instead do worrying about the name of a football team. you nutty people….

  56. cougar69rt03 says: Mar 3, 2014 11:55 PM

    I have Delaware Indian blood in me and in no way do I find or ever have found the Redskins name insulting or demeaning , nor did I find the Fighting Sioux name to be anything but fierce and a name to be respected . Grow up American liberals .Keep it real life has more problems then dealing with childish name changes or name calling .

  57. thuilen says: Mar 4, 2014 7:12 AM

    When is this going to stop? Now someone is suing McDonalds for 1.5 million because he was denied a second napkin and thought he heard the term “you people” uttered and took it as a racial slur. The poor fellow couldn’t work all day he was so upset. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that makes it a crime to hurt someones feelings.

  58. haraldsigurdson says: Mar 8, 2014 3:07 PM

    The Washington mascot is racist.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!