For example as I tried to hint at, people have a right to watch pornography between consenting adults, and companies have a right to sell and prosper from it. They have a right to create brands and market from them. No matter what either the feminist movement, or the religious right, or any other group thinks of it. You also have a right to read books that people may find offensive, and the authors and companies have a right to prosper from their work and brands financially. People can listen to bands that sing songs some aspect of the population may despises, and can profit from it. Being offended does not give ANYONE the right to stop a person from trying to make a living. The Washington Redskin name has not killed anyone, it has not harmed anyone, it has not raped anyone. It's a brand name. Just like Playboy has a right to their brand, just like Marilyn Manson has a right to his name and brand, just like the Harry Potter novels have a right to it's name and brand. And the fact that their are groups who are against pornography, metal music, and positive depictions of witchcraft does not change that fact. Likewise just because a very small minority with a vocal voice connected to powerful political machinery does not change the fact the Dan Snyder has a right to his trademarks. Your rights, his rights, my rights, and everyone's rights exist whether a minority like it or not. And governmental abuse is not the way to go about it.
The way the system is suppose to work, is that if you don't like something you try to alter peoples opinions. You don't use the heavy hand of the state in order to impose your personal morality. That's what is wrong with some members of the religious right, the feminist movement, and the victim hood groups, who try to turn society to their way of thinking by using the corrosive power of state force.
Your ignorant sarcasm aside sir or madam, you are correct. I don't like Danny Snyder but he has the same rights as every other person does. I would argue every person has these fundamental rights world wide, but in particular yes in America. You have a right to property. So does Dan Snyder. It's not a matter of popularity or voting.Poor Danny Snyder.. Such an atrocity to occur against a private American citizen, and his billion dollar, cash cow property. Thank God what's happening to Snyder right now isn't happening to millions of other American citizens in this country.
The same mentality you are arguing for right now, is the exact same mentality that was rightfully ridiculed when religious groups attempted to outlaw the Harry Potter series. A vocal minority does not have the right to destroy an individuals property rights just because they don't like the trademarked ideas or brands. That is not how the rule of law is suppose to work.
I have no problem with people trying to change Snyder's mind. Nor do I have problems with people putting market pressure on them or the NFL. I do have a problem with the government coming down on people's rights to score political points. This is not an area the government belongs in, and it is a disgrace to free individuals the world over that it would happen.