Sports are all about debate. Lord knows it has taken the place of actual competition for two-thirds of the broadcast day.

Can’t believe, though, that we the people are still having an actual discussion about the relative propriety of the nickname “Redskins.”

How is this still in play in 2014? That it’s being used by supporters of the status quo as some sort of symbolic evidence of stifled free speech is beyond my comprehension.

Yes, betcha by golly, Daniel Snyder and the National Football League team he owns have the freedom to call themselves whatever they want. And you and I have the freedom to tell him the use of that moniker — marketed by the franchise since it was based at Boston’s Fenway Park in 1933 — is indefensible.

I can’t imagine on what planet the use of an obvious racial slur as a company’s primary form of identification is considered acceptable.

Please, for just a minute, strip away your political disdain for some of the folks who are most outspoken about this issue. (Believe me, I have to, and if someone of my combative nature can do it, you can.) And please put away all your fallacy-laced, yeah-but arguments to the contrary.

This isn’t another brick in the wall. This has nothing to do with gun ownership, marriage equality, recreational marijuana or any other polarizing discussion on which your side may be gaining or losing ground. It’s about a prominent commodity being marketed with a word that two seconds worth of reasoned analysis should tell you is objectionable.

It doesn’t even sound right. If I lived in the capital district and my son were 4 years old again, I would cringe at my own efforts to indoctrinate him as a fan every time that word slipped out of my mouth.

There’s not even the flimsy defense, as one can make with the generic ‘Indians’ or ‘Braves’ or ‘Warriors,’ that you are paying homage to the fighting spirit of a race that is not our own. You know, the respect card.

Of course, the toothy, cartoonish logos make a mockery of that suggestion from the get-go. And if you actually believe that the Cleveland Indians’ name is a “tribute” to Maine’s own Louis Sockalexis, well, you’re simply ignorant of history and aren’t familiar with the real story of what the guy endured on a daily basis.

Even if you contend that there is conflicting evidence of the Washington football nickname’s origin, it’s readily apparent that the term is no compliment. At best, it’s a hold-over from an era when Native Americans were treated as fifth-class citizens; when the wounds of our country’s mistreatment of their people under the guise of “manifest destiny” were still painfully fresh.

It’s not a term of endearment, that’s for sure. Certainly not something you would flippantly say if you’re a true friend, a co-worker or the owner of a bazillion-dollar organization. Especially if you’re the latter.

Full disclosure: This controversy has been around for a while, and my position on it has changed often as Snyder has switched head coaches.

Twelve-or-so summers ago, I wrote a column questioning the pressure being placed on a few Maine high schools to change their Native American nicknames. A local gentleman with a background in that area politely sent me an email and a documentary on the subject.

We watched the video together as a newsroom. Even got into a pretty heated argument, as I recall. I was sports editor at the time, and in the end, I defended the use of those names in print for as long as the teams existed.

Where did the attempt to sanitize nicknames end, I asked. Fighting Irish? Cowboys? Aren’t we all offended by something?

I was young and foolish. As the decade moved on, some of the schools we occasionally cover changed their nicknames, and some did not. While we did not have a company-wide rule on the matter, I began policing myself. At first, I would use the questionable nickname only on first reference. Eventually I tried not to do it at all. It wasn’t that hard.

It was a personal conviction, and yes, I’m a huge believer in conviction, choice, freedom, and all that happy stuff we embrace and wave around in such a patriotic week as the one coming up. At this stage of my life, it’s just hard for me to understand the person who could see that nickname, let it bounce around in his head for a moment and not be ashamed of it.

Yes, we’re too easily offended by everything these days. And yes, there is understandable disdain toward public figures and their eagerness to air this issue out as a political football to achieve gain with their own bases, especially in a time when much more pressing things are startlingly wrong with America.

But that line of thinking emanates from the erroneous idea that those people run the country. Wrong. We do.

Constitutionally, I’m not sure there is anything that can force Snyder to do the right thing. Practically speaking, however, you and I can. Speak not only with your voice but your pen and your pocketbook.

Let’s put this nickname where it belongs: Into retirement as a sad chapter in our nation’s history, albeit with some between-the-lines encouragement that we’re still capable of learning and growth.

Hail to the people.

Kalle Oakes is a staff columnist. His email is koakes@sunjournal.com. Follow him on Twitter @Oaksie72.