I think that they are good because mascots are the symbol of the team and that means that people will be seeing and thinking of that mascot when someone says that team name. Its not trying to be offensive because they would not try to offend people over their symbol because thats the last thing they want is to be forced to change it. They try to be as correct as they can and people are just taking it the wrong way. Its not meant to be insensitive and a lot of people are proud to be one because they don't take it the wrong way.

They don't see it as insensitive. They look at the mascot in a positive way. in the article Arab-Americans cry foul over California high school mascot David Hinkle, the head of the board with his wife, was proud to be an arab. He said it was not to be insensitive, its just been that way forever and there is no reason to change if its not in an offensive way.

They should be able to keep it because that is the way it always was and it was OK then and all of a sudden its not OK. If they have had a mascot for a while they have the right to call their team that and you cant change that. In the article Arab- Americans cry foul over California high school mascot it is said that they have had their mascot for 50 to 60 years without a change. why force them to change what is history and make everyone look at them differently.

I think that they should be able to keep cultural mascots because it would be hard to change it. According to the article Arab-Americans cry foul over California high school mascot they have their mascot on everything including the walls and their gym shirts. Changing that is hard and very expensive. They would have to paint the walls over and buy more more gym uniforms and it would just cost a lot more money then needed.