azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

"Redskin" referring to the color of skin that Native Americans have. What would you do if Washington's name was the Blackskins? How is this any different? The definition of the slang Redskin comes up as "dated-offensive- Native American.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

There are a lot of Native Americans who do consider the term, a racial slur, to be insulting them, so how can you say it is not insulting the Native Americans when they are telling you it is?
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

The name redskins was created by early settlers that some say referred to their face paint according to Wikipedia. The name redskins honors the achievements and virtues of Native Americans and that it is not intended in a negative manner according to the owner of the Washington Redskins and the majority of the fans. Supporters also assert that the majority of Native Americans themselves are not offended backed on a public opinion poll in 2004. In September of 2014 71% of the public supported the continued use of the name "Redskins". For these reasons, I believe that the Washington Redskins should not change their name.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

The public should not be the ones deciding whether or not to change it, it should be the people it affects. Also, what is keeping them from changing the name? For your evidence to be correct, they need to be taking a poll on who it affects.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

Some people feel that the Washington Redskins should change their name. The Washington Redskins have had their name since the beginning of the team. Some say it's a racial slur others think it's tradition for honor and fame. In my opinion, I believe they should keep the name for two main reasons. That has been the name for so long and everyone's grown accustomed to it and no one got mad about it before. If people think it's hurtful I feel like it's what the team started as and deserves to stay.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

If no one has got mad over it before, why are they now? It doesn't matter about getting mad about it in the past, it is the present. Redskins is a racial slur now and it offend so many people not just native Americans, but people who are friends, related, or have ansectors that are Native American.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

I understand the statement where now it is becoming more important. But, I feel like this is over-dramatized by social media. Since long ago when people saw it they thought of it as another something that was set in stone. Now with people arguing from many things to Police activity, all the way to prices and packaging of goods people have been actively trying to change everything for good or for wrong. Of course this is not a proper argument just to clarify of course lots of people are getting more angered by this now. I asked a couple of my friends that are Native American who I questioned said it's no longer offensive since it was long ago when they considered it as a bad meaning but now it's simply a team name that people can use to support their team.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

I believe that even if some people think that's offensive ,the Indians that are known as the red skins might even take this as a good thing because they have a foot ball team named after them. The team is not being racist about the red skins there name is just red skins and the mascot is a red skinned Indian. Also the red skins foot ball team didn't make the Indian the name red skins, the red skinned indians had its name and the team just wanted to use it! And there for I think they should not change it!
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

There is no Indian tribe called the Redskins, so your argument is not relevant. Also in the Webster's Dictionary redskin is a racial slur. And, if it IS offensive like you said, why not change it for the better of everyone.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

As the United States works on becoming a more fair country, we try to rid our language of derogatory terms that involve ethnic stereotyping. Many sports teams around the country have changed their names from some form of the word 'Indian' to a less offensive title. but currently the debate has been over the name change of the Washington Redskins, a professional football team located in Washington, D.C. I do not believe the Redskins should change their name because it is not linking any offensive words or actions to the names.Although stated in the Merriam- Webster dictionary as an offensive term to describe Natives, the Washington Redskins have not used the name to describe any offenses they have committed and use the name with pride. As stated on the Redskins Facts website,"It [the name] epitomizes all the noble qualities we admire about Native Americans—the same intangibles we expect from Washington’s gridiron heroes on game day. Honor. Loyalty. Unity. Respect. Courage. And more." Also stated on the website, Native Americans created and used the word 'redskin' to define themselves, and first used the term as an inclusive expression of solidarity. Many Native tribes even support the use of the name. The Oklahoman takes a look at schools around Oklahoma that have American Indian nicknames and finds that these schools do not receive negative feedback for their names and mascots. In fact, these communities, comprised of a high number of Native Americans, are proud of the nicknames. a Redskins football coach Eric Cardin notes, “It’s always been a positive thing here, and when something like this with Capitol Hill, or with the Washington Redskins, is in the news, we usually hear from the local Native American tribes telling us that they don’t want us to change it.” Although the controversy over the Redskin's name has gone out of the frying pan and into the fire over the years, and probably will not get any better until the team changes their name, I do not believe the team should change their name. They use the term with high regards toward the ethnicity and do not link the name to any inimical actions or other words.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

A race with the sports and political media and the team name, Washington Redskins, goes on. Redskins fans believe that the name comes from from honor and a deep history, while activists argue that the name is a racial slur. The term redskins have been around for so long, especially in the 1800s. The "redskins" is not a racial slur but should not be changed now when they could have changed it 40 years ago. I don't believe that Dan Snyder, the owner, should change the name of the Redskins, especially if the Notre Dame Irish don't have to change their name. Some say that the name is offensive to Native Americans and is a racial slur. The name has been around since 1932 and just in two years or so the public wants Snyder to change the teams name. According to the interview Snyder did with ESPN, he would NEVER change the name of the Redskins and that his father was a huge fan of the Redskins. Also one of the athletes on his team said, "Dan Snyder wouldn't change the name over his dead body." There are lots of other team names that point out a certain ethnicity and the people don't seem to notice.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

For many years, the term "Washington Redskins" conjures a strong and steadfast team. To most, the term "redskin" suggests honor and prestige all across the nation. Others, however, interpret this as demoralizing and dispiriting. I disagree; I think the expression advocates pride and integrity. To many, the term refers to a strong-willed, fierce team. So why would anyone want to change it? Some think the term is derogatory. I think the term doesn't really put people down-I would be honored if a college mascot was named for the type of people I represent. Are the Indians ashamed that colleges use their race as a rallying point? When people create a mascot for a team, they try to create something that will cause people to join. Creating something non-offensive would be something like "Washington Butterflies." 1) This could be interpreted as "offensive to butterflies" 2) This type of name would not be seen as "a fierce rallying point". The name "Washington Redskins" gives a special meaning to the team, as every other mascot/name does. I also think there are more important things to think about than a mascot. So leave the name and this sensitive issue alone and let's move on to the real, much more significant topics.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

"Washington Redskins" is offensive because it is referring to the skin color of living people not animals,"Washington Butterflies"
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

The topic still is being argued on, whether or not that the seemingly "racist" name, Washington Redskins, is offensive or not. Many fans and even the owner of the Redskins, Daniel Snyder, says that the name honors the people and the history the name represents. Some activists oppose by saying "the name redskin is a racial slur, making it offensive. One thing is not fully clarified, HOW the name is racist, just because one person or group of people are called a certain color, it does not mean it relates to "idiot" or "stupid".
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

Although it may not relate to "idiot" or "stupid", the increasingly disparaging use over time, along with an association with the practice of paying bounties for killing Indians, has made the word derogatory. This makes it a racial slur because it refers to a group of people in a negative way.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

There has been a big debate going on about the changing of the Washington Redskins name. Native Americans and others are calling the team name "Redskin" a racial slur and should be changed but others (Native Americans included) think that they are displaying Native American culture.The majority of Native American mascots should not be changed because they are trying to represent Native Tribes.  Mascots honor Native American bravery, courage, and fighting skills. The "Redskins" name is not to make a name of Natives but honor the things that they can do and what they do.  Teams with the Native American name such as the Florida State University Seminoles support Native Americans by giving scholarships and reduced tuition to tribe members.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

The Washington Redskins have been a name of a football team for many years now, and lately there has been a conflict on whether the name should be changed or not. Their are two complete different sides about this argument and I agree that this name should not be changed. The Redskins logo and name should not be changed for many reasons, but I will only focus on two. First, the Redskins name and mascot was thought of and designed by a native American himself. Walter Blackie Wetzel, a political leader for the Blackfeet Nation is the one who came up with the Indian chief logo, and he says he’s proud of his work. The fact that a Native American came up with this design and Native Americans did not objected to it for many years. This is proof that a large portion of the Indian population don’t find the logo or the name offensive, proving that this is just another government issue to justify changing the First Amendment. Many people disagree with what I am saying, and I understand because the color red is considered the color of their skin. They think that its racist to all Native Americans and it should be changed. Second, this team had been in existence since 1930's and there was never an issue for 60 years until the 1990's. If they decide to change the name now then their gonna loose all their honor and fans. The name and the logo is deep rooted within the hearts and minds of the fans. All in all, I think that the Redskins should keep their name and tradition going on.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

I don't think that the "Washington Redskins" should change their name. They shouldn't change their name because it's part of their culture. Some people will take it to offense, but to others it's part of their lifestyle. Many people are really into sports and probably been with that team their whole life. The name the Washington Redskins was also stared along time ago and over the years peoples views on names and sayings are getting more and more sensitive. I think it is a good idea to have a name such as Washington Redskins because it means something that relates to culture and lifestyles.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

I agree that it is a lifestyle and many do take their sports very seriously but racial team names being offensive to people should be above watching a game of football in importance. Football is a great sport but racist names also brings many unwanted stereotypes on native Americans.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

I think that the "Washington Redskins" should not change theirname. There are many reasons I believe this, first of all you have to remember that this foot ball team was created in 1932! A lot of things have changed since then, this year and day we take offense to racial terms but, we don't know if they did back then. The dictionaries have changed also, through the 1960's and 1970's the dictionary said that a redskin was a "North American Indian" I am aware that redskins is a slur in the dictionary now, but honestly we don't know! As stated in the Wikipedia article we don't even know why the first Americans called them redskins! Some scholars think the early Americans referred to skin tone while others say, it could have been body paint! As you can see I truly believe that the Washington Redskins should not have to change their name.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

By changing the name it doesn't remove it from our history it doesn't take the name Washington Redskins out of the record books for the NFL it just makes it more pertinent to today's culture. We need to make this a more sensitive matter. It used to be acceptable to have slaves and say the "N-word" but thank goodness now it's not. And that should be the same way with the Redskins. If we kept doing the same things we done before because it was history and tradition then we would still be typing this debate on typewriters not our iPads.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

As you stated in your argument, " some scholars think the early Americans referred to skin tone while others say, it could have been body paint!" Who are these scholars? I would like to see more evidence please.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

Yes I agree with you that many things have changed since since 1932, but back then they did take offense to racial terms. For example they used to call black people "Negros". 80 years ago the redskins had a coach named Lone Star Dietz, after the redskins moved to Washington they named their team name after their coach for honor, but now the young Native Americans are realizing its more offensive than an honor.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

The Redskins logo in use today was first designed in 1971 in close consultation with Native American leaders. Many people are debating whether the name "Washington Redskins" should consider changing because it is "offensive" to the Native Americans. To my opinion the name is not offensive, in fact it is an honor. Prominent Indian leaders of the 19th century are documented as having referred to themselves as “Red Men” or “Red-skins". The name "Washington Redskins is honoring the Native Americans. Did you know the Washington Redskins were the first team in the NFL with an official marching band and also the first team to have a fight song, "Hail to the Redskins". People should embrace the positive ideas so we can preserve our Native American heritage. I respect the name "Redskins" and it's not wrong at all for wanting to be loyal to the Native Americans. Why would somebody make up a name just to make someone feel bad about there self? That would be wrong, but we are respecting them for who they are. A debate on usatoday.com says 83% of people would not call a Native American a "Redskin" to their face. "Washington Redskins" is not calling Native Americans "Redskin" their face. This isn't a label, it's honor to the Native Americans. High schools on Native American reservations, including Red Mesa High School in Teec Nos Pos, AZ (Navajo Nation) and Wellpinit High School in Wellpinit, WA (Spokane Tribe), continue to use the Redskins name and logo.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

As you stated in the first paragraph, how do you know that the native American leaders were in close consultation as the redskins logo was being created?
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

http://www.redskinsfacts.com/factsOn the webpage it states that they were. It will be located by hitting "the facts" and then scroll down to "history of our name". It is the second bullet point and states "Prominent Indian leaders of the 19th century—from Sitting Bull (a Hunkpapa Lakota Chief) to French Crow (Principal Chief of the Wahpekute band of Santee Sioux) to Tecumseh (a Shawnee chief)—are documented as having referred to themselves as “Red Men” or “Red-skins.”
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

It doesn't say anywhere on the website that the Native Americans were in close consultation while the Redskins logo was being designed...All it says was they referred to themselves as "Red Men" or "Red Skins". It doesn't say they want the skin color on the logo to be red.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

The Washington Redskins became an established American football team in 1932. They have won Super Bowls XVII, XXII, XXVI and have an overall postseason record of 23 wins and 17 losses. The Redskins are owned by Dan Snyder who, over the years, has been told that the name of the team is a derogatory term and that he should change the name. So should Dan Snyder change the name of the team from the Redskins to something less derogatory? I don't think Dan Snyder should change the Redskins team name. There are many reasons as to why I don't think that the name should be changed. The first reason why is because I haven't heard about any native Americans complaining about the name in the news. This is the first I have heard of this argument. I would personally find it a good thing for a football team to be named after my race or ethnic group because obviously the race is good at what they do or a football team wouldn't want to be named after them. In a page by the Great Falls Tribune, they speak to members of the Blackfeet tribe. A Blackfeet man named Lauren Falcon said "As soon as I saw the logo—that was me. I felt honored. I thought that was the coolest thing in the world. I still do." A former Blackfeet tribal chairman and a past president of the National Congress of American Indians named Walter Wetzel is credited for coming up with the Redskins team logo.  I understand that other people might think the name Redskin is a racial slur since Mariam-Webster dictionary defined it as one and a site called Racial Slur Database included it as a slur towards Native Americans. Just because the name means a slur now, doesn't mean the name was a slur when the team was named. People should respect the name and accept the fact that the name wasn't meant as a slur.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

So should Dan Snyder change the name of the team from the Redskins to something less derogatory?-This shows you know that the term Redskins is a derogatory term so why would you want the name to stay the same? Your last paragraph states that it is a slur now. If it's a slur then we need to change it because the world has evolved and people need to keep up with the time and while it is a historic term, it is a racial slur now and it needs to be changed -
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

Should the Washington Redskins change their name? Many believe that the team name "Redskin" is a racial slur. But the argument from the Redskins is that they do it to honor the Native American tribes. I see this as a racial slur but also a sign of honor. Sport media has been pressuring for the Redskins to change their team name, but lots of fans want to keep the name, same with the players.  I believe that the Washington Redskins should keep their name. I believe this because I believe that sports authority and some people are making this a bigger deal than this really is. I think that they don't look at the name at both sides, it can also be a sign of honoring those Indian tribes. I think that theirs more things to worry about instead of an NFL football team name. Also, theirs not a lot of people that disagree with the name, it's just the name of a football team. That is of course, in my opinion. This is why I think that the Washington Redskins shouldn't change their name.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

Over the past several years, the debate over whether or not the Washington Redskins should change their name has escalated. Most people say that this teams name is a racial slur and needs to be changed, while others think that there is a piece of the teams history and shouldn't be changed. In my opinion, it shouldn't be changed.  Many people want the name to be changed because it is considered a racial term, even though the term was created by Native Americans and was also approved by Native American leaders. The term "redskin" was also used to refer to chiefs by other Native Americans. They also used this term to differentiate themselves from the Europeans.  As heard on FOX News, 90 percent of Native Americans polled that the term was not offensive. If the team's name was so offensive, the NFL surely would have changed it by now. Believe what you want, but in my opinion, the teams name isn't racist and doesn't need to be changed.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

I think everyone is doing a great job, but a point I don't think anyone has mentioned yet is that, we don't know what the motive was to creating this team name that has obviously created many great debacles. People will take offense to anything, saying that cauq-Asians live on Starbucks, Chipolte, and selfies. That is a huge stereo type right now. I believe that the "racial slur" of the name, is in intentional, and even though pope ole take offense to it, it is not intended to do that.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: No, leave it alone.

Although that the Washington Redskins have a name that many people are unhappy with, the name of a team doesn't really matter. Some may think it is a racial slur, and I do agree with it, but not all people think it is. The Washington Redskins have been a NFL team since 1932 and all, of this controversy was started at the beginning of the 21st century. Dan Snyder states that "he has had Indian players on the team and that it is a tribute to them." He also says that "it wasn't a label, but a symbol or badge of honor." According to redskinsfacts.com, it epitomizes all the noble qualities that we love and admire about Native Americans.
Debate: Native American Mascots 8th
Side: Yes, change it.

You have stated that the term redskins is a racial slur.... Yet you are on the side that does not want to change the team name. Please put some more evidence or detail to why the team name should not change.