Did I insult Native Americans today?

Great Debates
1

A debate may break out here, but in case not, mods feel free to move.

I am in law school and we had a mock oral argument today regarding a pretend appellate issue. I am “representing” a fake Indian tribe who is attempting to negotiate a gaming pact with a fictional state and the state’s governor is refusing to do so.

Anyhoo, I open my argument with a quote from Red Cloud: “I have but a small spot of land left. The Great Spirit has told me to keep it.”

I then explained how Red Cloud obviously was not referring to casino gambling, but the broader sense of his statement, the control and self-determination of Indian tribes, were at the heart of the case at hand.

I then went into arguments and finished.

Game face off and the professor said that I should be very careful about using a quote like I did. He said that in his years of practice, he knows that some judges would be highly offended by my use of that quote and “shut me down” meaning they wouldn’t listen to the rest of my argument.

I was flabbergasted. I asked him what would possibly be offensive about it. He replied that he didn’t think it was offensive, but that some judges might. Anyways, time was up and I moved on.

I asked some of my fellow classmates if what I said was offensive. Three of them felt the same as I did: couldn’t see a bit of a problem with it.

However, another classmate, a Japanese-American student, was APPALLED when I told her what I did. She was actually mad herself saying that I had NO RIGHT to use the words of a Native American Chief when I do not come from that culture or understand the meaning of the words. She actually said that if the Dean heard my speech, I should face disciplinary sanctions!!!

I’ll admit. I’m a white boy from West Virginia and my sonar for insensitivity is not at all there. Can anyone better explain to me how what I said would offend Native Americans? After all, I was their “lawyer” and those words were used to help this “tribe.”

2

I can’t. Neither can I imagine how a judge would feel offended by it, and I’d ask your professor for clarification.

3

there are plenty of reasons why a legal education is wasted on you but this is not a reason to deprive you of one. I vote not racist but I can’t tell if its offensive. White folks can quote gandhi and MLK but it might be offensive coming from David Duke. Are you David Duke cuz if you are then I change my mind.

4

I imagine that the objection is that you’re invoking religion, when you aren’t of that religion.

If you’re just taking something that sounds good, and sounds meaningful to other people, then you’re effectively taking someone else’s most firmly held beliefs and using them like a hand in poker. It’s insulting.

If you presented the same quote in the context of your search to understand the beliefs of the people, come across as really doing your best, as being interested and respectful of those beliefs, etc. then you could make it fly. But if you’re just quoting it and moving on, then it doesn’t have a lot of weight and could look a bit crass.

Personally, it wouldn’t bother me, but I wouldn’t give you a very high mark for using it unless you could insert it into the greater context of the religion of the people.

5

Lawyer here. I see no problem with using the quote. Matter of fact, I think it was powerful and effective.

I think your professor is overly cautious, and your Japanese-American student was just off the charts crazy.

Part of being a lawyer is developing a certain amount of empathy for your clients. You speak for them in places they cannot do so as effectively as one trained in argument the way we are. To a certain extent, we stand in the client’s shoes before the Court. I would not hesitate to use a quote from an appropriate source where applicable to a particular case.

I guess your classmate would also have a problem with you quoting Martin Luther King, Jr. when arguing a civil rights case? Gotta remember law schools tend to be bastions of liberalism and over the top political correctness. The real world doesn’t really work the way a lot of professors seem to think it should.

6

I guess I can see how someone might be offended, in the sense that they might think you’re trivializing words spoken in a much graver context by using them in defense of a casino. But your classmate’s reaction seems wildly over-the-top.

7

Atheist lawyers aren’t allowed to quote the bible, then?

8

Supposedly, if the OP’s teacher is right. Though Christianity might be different since it’s sufficiently well-understood by the average American, atheist or not.

9

Typical postmodernist political correctness bullshit, take no heed I urge ye.

10

What if the classmate was a Korean-American?

11

I’m not sure what’s being said here but Korean-Americans can make idiotic statements, after all Kim Jong-Il is Korean and I certainly don’t defend or like him,.

12

Well, your prejudice against Japanese is well-known, just thought I’d ask. OK.

So now I’ll ask for clarification of your definition of “typical postmodernist political correctness bullshit.” Then I’ll ask why you didn’t make that charge (whatever it may turn out to be) against the professor or the judges that he seemed to think would be offended, but only against the Japanese-American classmate.

13

I am not prejudiced against the Japanese, only against Bushidoist-Tojoist ideology.

I mean the usual PC hype about how if you aren’t black (for example) you can’t make any sort of judgement on black culture or comment on it or use it or make jokes about it or whatnot.

Because his/her comment was ridiculously over the top-almost a self-parody.

14

Whatever you say.

OK, what’s that usual PC hype? I’d like for you to demonstrate an understanding of the words you are using.

The professor obviously felt the same way, while not using those words. The professor (apparently, as reported) felt that some judges would feel the same way. I don’t see any reason that you snipped that part and only responded to the part about the classmate.

15

<hijack=slight>
Why? If the gaming is going to take place on reservation land, the state has no jurisdiction. It’s a federal issue.
</hijack>

16

It doesn’t seem offensive to me, but I can see how others might see it that way.

Martin Luther King and Gandhi where speaking to public audiences in a political context using specific methods to achieve certain political goals. When we quote them, we are referencing those methods and goals.

I have no idea what Red Cloud was talking about, and unless you have put a lot of study into it, neither do you. He may well have been talking about some deeply held personal belief that you have no way of understanding. Who knows- maybe he was referring to something you’d find distasteful. Maybe in his cultural context it meant “we should commit genocide” or “I like cheese” or “goats are angels.”

It’s tacky, at best, to use something that seems clearly pretty personal and important to a person and a culture, of which I’m guessing you don’t know a ton about, as a gambit.

Imagine if some lawyer in a tax evasion trial in China used an image of the Kennedy assassination or a clip of the planes crashing in to the twin towers to make some trivial point. Imagine a Korean soda pop commercial showing the Challenger disaster with the phrase “bursting with flavor.” A bit offensive, huh? That’s the kind of ground you are starting to tread on.

17

I was going to say it shouldn’t take a lot of study, but googling “Red Cloud” and the quote in the OP gives me exactly one result: this thread.

Perhaps I should retire from the fray.

That said, it wasn’t a trivial point, it was the opening in a trial, (Yeah, yeah, student, mock trial, whatever.) in which the OP was defending Native Americans. Are you arguing that only Native American lawyers are allowed to use such a quote?

18

I don’t think your statement is clearly offensive…
…but I do have reservations about it!

b’DOOM kssh

19

This is the only way I can think someone might think it was offensive. I personally don’t. But then I’m an atheist, and I have no respect for anyone’s religious sensibilities, if indeed it’s the religious/spiritual nature of the original quote.

20

I’m a lawyer, and I don’t think it is * per se* offensive. I think the student suggested discipline is way off base.

I don’t think that the quote is applicable to your legal situation on a gambling license. The nature of the quote is that your client doesn’t want someone to steal their land. This suggests that gambling licenses are not the proper subject of lawsuits, and you cite the Great Spirit as the legal authority. This may be persuasive in a political speech, but a legal argument is something different: it’s far more boring. My suggestion is to think long and hard about what your audience is going to want to consider for argument. In this case it isn’t Red Cloud’s eloquence, it is instead a quote from binding authority.