Are racial stereotypes and patently offensive to easily identified groups. Groups who make known the fact that they’re offended.
Blackhawks, Seminoles. Illini. and (Fighting) Irish
could be offensive, but those groups seem to have embraced the mascot. So there isn’t a problem.
Padres, Pirates, Mariners, Metropolitans, Aggies, Yankees, Knicks(erbockers), Angels, (Trolley) Dodgers, Athletics, Maple Leafs, Boilermakers, Volunteers, Minutemen, Tar Heels, Sooners, Steelers, 49ers
These are non-pejoritive nicknames either geogrpahical or occupational that I’ve never heard anyone take offense to. I’d be interested in you making the case that any of these are offensive to someone. (Other than a Braves fan like myself whois offended by the very existence of the perfidious Mets).
Pistons, SuperSonics, Reds, Blues, Nuggets, Hurricaines, Longhorns, Broncos, Colts
Since these are either inanimate objects or animals. If they were to take offense it would be difficult for us to know. I’d pay cash money to see you make a case that one of these groups is offended by such as mascot.
I find it laughable that any individual Muslim would be offended by the name Crusaders but would not be equally offended by the various mascots and nicknames listed above. Are we that offended by history?
I think you’re being a bit disingenuous here. Surely, you are aware that many Muslims are offended by “Crusader”?
So are you saying you find them hypocritical by being offended?
The way I think about these things is that we (especially as Catholics who follow the God of Love) are obliged to treat people the way they want to be treated. If they find “Crusader” as a team mascot offensive, I think we should either change it or say up front that we don’t care if we offend them.To tell them they shouldn’t be offended is hypocritical.