Redskins and other offensive product names

[Benton]

(10-04-2016, 12:13 PM)Au165 Wrote: Neither do small groups speaking for larger groups. As a country though, we have agreed that majorities in most cases should get to make the decisions unless it becomes an issue of safety or liberties.

We're a representative democracy. We've agreed that chosen minorities in most cases should get to make the decisions based on their belief/interpretation/education. Our courts, legislature, your town council... they're all representative democracies.

Also, the safety issue is one concern over disparaging terms. When you lump a group of people in together and label them with subversive terms, you're furthering the idea that their contributions to their society, or their quality of life and rights, are inferior to others. 

(10-04-2016, 01:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I'd argue that denying his speech the same protection of all other speech is "abridging" his rights.  

"Abridging" is a much lower standard than "prohibiting".

His speech is protected. His ability to benefit financially may be abridged, but that's not the same as a 1st Amendment issue.