Monday, February 13, 2012

Insult or Honor

.....AND WE'RE BACK!

We will be getting back into the swing of things with our bi-weekly reading articles.  The OGT is only 1 month away.

Answer the following questions in 2-3 complete sentences.

1. In which state does a 2010 law give residents the right to contest racial based nicknames?

2. Schools indentified by the NCAA were able to keep their names if they what?

3. Is forcing these chools to change their names fair considering the cost the schools/universities must pay to change equipment and apparel?

4. Do you believe the use of Native American logos and symbols by athletic teams to be offensive or justified?

6 comments:

  1. Danny-
    1. In which state does a 2010 law give residents the right to contest racial based nicknames?
    The state they are talking about is Wisconsin.

    2. Schools indentified by the NCAA were able to keep their names if they what?
    Only if the indian tribal leaders approved their names.

    3. Is forcing these schools to change their names fair considering the cost the schools/universities must pay to change equipment and apparel?
    No,just because one little senior is offended doesn't mean the schools should pay hundreds of thousands of dollars.
    4. Do you believe the use of Native American logos and symbols by athletic teams to be offensive or justified?
    I think the teams are paying tribute to the indians,and that everyone is just over exaggerating .

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1. The state that give the residents the right to contest racial based nickname in 2010 is Wisconsin.
    2. The School that get to keep their name had to get permission from the tribal leaders.
    3. The school must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to change the equipment and apparel.
    4.I think its for honor not to insult the native americans.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1.) Winsconsin passed the law giving residents the right to contest race-based nicknames, logos, or mascots.

    2.) NCAA were able to keep their name if they got permission from tribal leaders.

    3.) I don't think forcing these schools to change their names is fair ; considering equipment is expensive... The state or people who want the changes should pay for the costly items.

    4.)I also don't believe the Native American logos and symbols to be offensive. I feel as though it should give pride to Indians to say that they are tough, I don't see why that should be offensive.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1. The state that residents have the right to contest racial based nicknames is wisconsin.

    2.If the schools got permission from the tribal leaders they could keep their names

    3.no its not fair if they have pride in their name and mascot then they should be able to keep the name and mascot

    4.The native americans logos and symbals by the athletice teams are justified to me at lest .

    ReplyDelete
  5. 1. In which state does a 2010 law give residents the right to contest racial based nicknames?

    Wisconsin.

    2. Schools indentified by the NCAA were able to keep their names if they what?

    If the indian tribal leaders approved their names.

    3. Is forcing these chools to change their names fair considering the cost the schools/universities must pay to change equipment and apparel?

    No only because one senior is offended doesn't mean the schools should pay that much money.

    4. Do you believe the use of Native American logos and symbols by athletic teams to be offensive or justified?

    Justified because the teams are just paying tribute to Indians, people just over exaggerate

    ReplyDelete
  6. 1 ; The state that passed the law in 2010 that allowed residents to contest racial based nicknames was Wisconsin.
    2 ; The NCAA identified schools could keep their nicknames if they were given permission from nearby Native American tribal leaders.
    3 ; Forcing these schools to change their names isnt fair, in my opinion, because schools should be able to make a choice on their own.
    4 ; I believe that the use of Navite Americans logos and symbols is both offensive and justified. Offensive because not all Native Americans were warriors. Justified because they dont get notoriety

    ReplyDelete