Puja wrote:Digby wrote:morepork wrote:
You've gone fucking sideways man. The largest and only terrorist attack on NZ soil (the French sinking a Greenpeace ship aside), targeting a particular religious demographic, is "piffle"? Incidental? Really?
The requirement to change the name of a sporting team as a response is piffle.
Since you're fond of an analogy, how about we posit a team called the Canterbury Klan? They could have a mascot dressed in a white hood who runs around with a comedically oversized noose.
Feels wrong? How's it different?
Puja
Depends on the context, in a national sporting event no, in a Students 7s event maybe. I don't start by wanting to ban things and thinking people have a right not to be offended though.
And btw, we've had a few terrorist attacks in this country carried out by Irish folks, and nobody has a problem that I know of with London Irish, other than they're often neither London based nor Irish, and we've not had any demands to change the name Saracens after people who identify with a certain type of Islamic belief system have accidentally carried out a few attacks.
And if a name change is the correct response to slaughters, terrorist attacks or what have you then in this instance rather than insist there be a change to the nickname of a sporting team one might want to look at the association with the words Christ and Church, far more people have been killed, maimed, raped in the name of Christ and the Church than the Crusaders could have ever hoped to manage. If you can keep a city called Christchurch it does seem rather pointless to me to worry about the nickname of a local sporting team to that city