# Government having a say over what you name your baby.



## Vishnu2 (Jul 16, 2012)

Should the Government have a say over what we name our children?

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/vi...29rLWxpa2Utc2VuZCZhcD10cnVl&from=en-us_fblike

Or

http://www.namecandy.com/celebrity-...29/banned-baby-names-is-your-name-on-the-list

(Can you move this to the appropriate section)


----------



## Lilithlee (Jul 16, 2012)

I don't think the govement should have any right in what we name our children. That being said, there are stupid people out there but why you can change your name when you become of age. 

P.S. There is a country that already has a law about uni-sex name, I just can't remember which.


----------



## Terry Allan Hall (Jul 19, 2012)

A couple of White Supremists named their son Adolph Hitler (Last name)...CPS took him and a couple of siblings into protective custody, although I think it as for more than just their parent's choices of names. 

I really am generally opposed to name bans, though.


----------



## Madkins007 (Jul 19, 2012)

I'm of two minds on this. I don't think the 'gummint' should interfere with things nearly as much as they do, but they also have a certain obligation to protect the helpless and terminally idiotic. When parents actually THOUGHT about the consequences of names, this was a non-issue, but more and more parents are either using the names to make some sort of statement, or just being plain foolish with them.

Several other civilized countries limit names and their societies did not collapse.


----------



## RonHays (Jul 19, 2012)

I agree 100% with you Mark.


----------



## yagyujubei (Jul 19, 2012)

There's no law that says you can't call your child No. 14 bus shelter, however to try to use this name on a government form would lead to confusion. What about when Prince was using that set of symbols for a name? There's no reason you can't name your child Eleven, but 11 could cause problems. I don't think this is any sort of attempt on the part of government to control us, but for their purposes, there has to be some sort of uniformity. I don't think you can name your child a name in a foreigh alphabet either. However, I am sure that the English equivalent is fine.


----------



## Lilithlee (Jul 19, 2012)

yagyujubei said:


> There's no law that says you can't call your child No. 14 bus shelter, however to try to use this name on a government form would lead to confusion. What about when Prince was using that set of symbols for a name? There's no reason you can't name your child Eleven, but 11 could cause problems. I don't think this is any sort of attempt on the part of government to control us, but for their purposes, there has to be some sort of uniformity. I don't think you can name your child a name in a foreigh alphabet either. However, I am sure that the English equivalent is fine.



This is kinda a silly question but I wonder if it would be less of an issue if you spell out eleven vs the number alone. lol


----------



## Nixxy (Jul 19, 2012)

It shouldn't be government regulated, in my opinion.

But honestly, that doesn't mean people should abuse it and name their children things that are absolutely ridiculous.

But also, "ridiculous" could be seen as different by different people.

But I don't mean like "ridiculous" as in Sunshine or Moonbeam, those are pretty neat..but when you name your kid Godzilla Stalin Frankengoose, that's just...moronic.


----------



## Edna (Jul 19, 2012)

... and when you name your child ''9%9#' no agency that deals with your child, such as Social Security, schools, pediatrician, whatever, can deal with that name in its database. It would be nice to be able to rely on parents to give their children real names, but since we can't I'm glad there's some regulation.

Relax. You can still create yet another aphonetic way to spell Michael or Tiffany and give that name to your child. Or you can still name your child Listerine or Good Lovin.


----------



## dmmj (Jul 19, 2012)

Godzilla Stalin Frankengoose Damn someone stole my idea.
Seems like new zealand and malaysia are the top countries banning names. When you start to allow your government to ban names where does it stop? Are there a lot of stupid names out there? yes. Does the government have the right to decide which ones to ban? no.


----------



## Nixxy (Jul 19, 2012)

I completely agree dmmj.

Think of it this way though, no matter how much absolute control a country has over it's people...the people will still do stupid things, will still disobey to some level, and still basically do what they want.

Are laws and structure good? Absolutely. They are a necessity in a stable civilization. I personally have a lot of socialist / Marxist views, even. But there is a point of limitations. Everything in moderation, I say. If you pass a law like this, it will do more harm than good. Also, it's entirely unnecessary.


----------



## Vishnu2 (Jul 20, 2012)

Nixxy said:


> It shouldn't be government regulated, in my opinion.
> 
> But honestly, that doesn't mean people should abuse it and name their children things that are absolutely ridiculous.
> 
> ...



Well stated.


----------



## Madkins007 (Jul 21, 2012)

dmmj said:


> Godzilla Stalin Frankengoose Damn someone stole my idea.
> Seems like new zealand and malaysia are the top countries banning names. When you start to allow your government to ban names where does it stop? Are there a lot of stupid names out there? yes. Does the government have the right to decide which ones to ban? no.



You forgot France and Germany, and I believe Britain has been in the news for this as well.


----------



## CourtneyAndCarl (Jul 21, 2012)

I don't think the government should have a say unless you name your kid something really derogitory.


Terry Allan Hall said:


> A couple of White Supremists named their son Adolph Hitler (Last name)...CPS took him and a couple of siblings into protective custody, although I think it as for more than just their parent's choices of names.
> 
> I really am generally opposed to name bans, though.



There is a lot of conspiracy around that because there was no sign of child abuse in the home, and while it was obvious that the parents were raising the children to be Nazis (their daughter's name was Aryan Nation) they had never done anything illegal and as of yet, they still haven't released the exact reason that they took the kids. That leaves the public to wonder if they really just took them because they were being raised as Nazis. While I agree that Nazism is wrong, it isn't illegal, last time I checked.


----------



## Mgridgaway (Jul 24, 2012)

When it comes to freedom, I usually take an all or none approach. Either you have freedom or you don't. Personally, I think people should be able to name their kids whatever they want, even if it is the stupidest name ever. That is what freedom is all about. When the government can pick and choose what names are legal and what aren't, that is not freedom.

It's kind of the same thing with the westboro baptist church. While I absolutely despise what they do and think that they are truly terrible people, freedom of speech gives them the absolute right to picket and protest. If we budge on stuff like that, precedents are set that allow for budging on other stuff, and that makes for a slippery slope.


----------



## CourtneyAndCarl (Jul 24, 2012)

Mgridgaway said:


> When it comes to freedom, I usually take an all or none approach. Either you have freedom or you don't. Personally, I think people should be able to name their kids whatever they want, even if it is the stupidest name ever. That is what freedom is all about. When the government can pick and choose what names are legal and what aren't, that is not freedom.
> 
> It's kind of the same thing with the westboro baptist church. While I absolutely despise what they do and think that they are truly terrible people, freedom of speech gives them the absolute right to picket and protest. If we budge on stuff like that, precedents are set that allow for budging on other stuff, and that makes for a slippery slope.



I totally agree with you last sentiment, about the westburo baptists. It's totally in their rights to do what they do, morally right or not. But I also think it's completely fair of the people on motorcycles to scare them away, just as long as no laws are broken by either parties


----------



## Mgridgaway (Jul 24, 2012)

futureleopardtortoise said:


> Mgridgaway said:
> 
> 
> > When it comes to freedom, I usually take an all or none approach. Either you have freedom or you don't. Personally, I think people should be able to name their kids whatever they want, even if it is the stupidest name ever. That is what freedom is all about. When the government can pick and choose what names are legal and what aren't, that is not freedom.
> ...



I totally agree. I applaud the people that come and block them out of view so that the mourning can have some peace. The law can't and shouldn't try to block them, but that doesn't mean the people can't (within reason, of course)


----------

