Open Thread: Ballot Question 1
The floor (aka the comments section) is open, for people who’d like to discuss why they will or will not be voting for or against the first question that will appear on the Nov. 2 Rhode Island ballot…
AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE (CHANGING THE OFFICIAL NAME OF THE STATE)Voting yes will change the name of the state. Voting no will keep it as is.
Approval of the amendment to the Title, Preamble and Section 3 of Article III of the Rhode Island Constitution set forth below will have the effect of changing the official name of the State from “State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations” to “State of Rhode Island”
I’ll be voting NO on Question One. I’ll agree to the change of our history when The NAACP agrees to remove or replace the word ” Colored “, historically considered offensive to African Americans, from their name. What’s good for the Goose is good for the Gander. This subject is the EPITOME of Political Correctness.
I won’t vote for it, it is just silly. If the word “plantations” is offensive to some, that is only because of a limited facility with the English language. I am reminded of the news commentator fired for using “niggardly”.
No, because it is ridiculous.
Not just NO, but Hell NO!!!
What a waste of time…
That the GA “Leadership” allowed this to go forward and the GA even voted to put this on the ballot is proof that they need to be replaced.
NO f**kin’ way!!This is politically correct crap.
I’m sure Phil,sammy,and OTL wil be voting yes.Actually,sammy lives in Arizona,so that would be two out of three.
I will be voting against this ridiculous proposal. It represents the absolute worst of the politically correct cleansing of our society. It is sad that the government would pandering to s segment of society too stupid to realize that the word plantations has nothing to do with slavery in this context.
It is embarrassing that people this ignorant of history and the English language have a significant enough representation to even bring this joke before the voters. Hopefully the proposal is defeated and the politicians who advanced it are swiftly turned out of office.
Since Rhode Island’s strongest tie with slavery was the slave trade coming through Newport’s docks, perhaps the appropriate response is to remove Rhode Island from the state’s name and leave Providence Plantations intact.
If I were still living in State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations I would be voting “NO” keep the original name the same. As a matter of fact I moved into a “Plantation” in Hawaii. There are still active plantations in Hawaii.
Nobody in Hawaii has a problem with the word “Plantations”!
None of these politically correct name changers have talked about the cost of the state name change and the fact you can’t just sweep history under the table. It would be nice if some people stopped fighting the civil war and continually re-energizing racial divide.
It is embarrassing that people this ignorant of history and the English language have a significant enough representation to even bring this joke before the voters.
Don’t look now, but you just described most of the General Assembly.
Yes
Change the name, the “Island” part is stupid
IT’S NOT AND ISLAND ! !
Rhode Island IS an island. Rhode Island is the official name for Aquidneck Island. The reason the state has its unusually long name is that it is actually a union of two colonies – Rhode Island (i.e. Aquidneck Island) and Providence Plantations (the “mainland” portion of the state).
No. Absolutely not. I would suggest that anyone offended by the word ‘Plantations’ hit the books on our history. We’re basically (mostly, sort of) the good guys.
This is so typical of the so called conservatives that comment here to care more about preserving an official name than preserving waterfront land for all of us to enjoy.
By all means lets preserve waterfront property with all that free money floating around Smith Hill.
Phil-this post was about the name change,so now conservatives are uncaring scrooges because we stayed on topic unlike you?Whew!!
You’re too much pal.
Hey Phil, the cost of acquiring taxable land: $14,000,000 plus lost property tax revenue. The cost of keep the states name intact, 0. You do the math.
Definitely NO! We have few enough distinctions for our state. Let’s keep our smallest state with the largest name. 😉
Seriously though, they tell us this will cost nothing, but think of all the things that have our state’s ‘official’ name on it and every one of those things would have to be purchased again; letterhead, paperwork, all kinds of stationary, seals, logos, etc. It’s just another way for them to slip through new everything while telling us it didn’t cost us a dime. Stop spending money on unneeded items right now. Revisit this in a few years when the economy turns around.
Just because Sammy lives in Arizona doesn’t mean he didn’t arrange for some illegal alien to vote for him here.
I’m torn on this one. As a black man, the first commenter’s quote on “colored” historically being an offensive term to black people is just wrong. Colored didn’t become politically incorrect until sometime in the 70s…1970s that is. Black people called themselves negroes for a long time.
And if colored was so offensive why would black people associate with the NAACP?????
I’m very conservative when it comes to issues like renaming because I’m generally not a revisionist. If in our history we enslaved people, well that’s what we did. We shouldn’t try to cover it or put it in some closet. I hate political correctness more than just about anything out there.
At the same time, if I made a choice in a vacuum to vote for the name of the state I’d vote “Rhode Island”. Sigh…not sure on this one…
I’m torn on this one. As a black man, the first commenter’s quote on “colored” historically being an offensive term to black people is just wrong. Colored didn’t become politically incorrect until sometime in the 70s…1970s that is. Black people called themselves negroes for a long time.
And if colored was so offensive why would black people associate with the NAACP?????
I’m very conservative when it comes to issues like renaming because I’m generally not a revisionist. If in our history we enslaved people, well that’s what we did. We shouldn’t try to cover it or put it in some closet. I hate political correctness more than just about anything out there.
At the same time, if I made a choice in a vacuum to vote for the name of the state I’d vote “Rhode Island”. Sigh…not sure on this one…