Teen legally known only as 'Girl' battles to use her own name, page 3

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:07 PM by Oceanborn

I have a feeling that the younger ATSers will be supporting this while the older ones will be against it.

I'm gonna bookmark this thread.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:14 PM by MikeNice81

reply to post by Unity_99

I disagree. I had a friend named Berbex. His name means stupid in Latin. He managed to go on and get a PHD and now makes more money in a month than I do in a year. The name would seem abusive. It is hard to pronounce and it literally means stupid. However, he overcame and prospered. He just tells people to call him, "Beckus."

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:15 PM by Unity_99

reply to post by MikeNice81

Well most borderline names like that are not targetted by the law. And the ones that are, like the Hitler ones, were probably undercover agents, trying to set up more of a nanny state.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:18 PM by Unity_99

Originally posted by Maslo
I dunno, if the name is really degrading or offensive, then I can see how some regulation can make sense. However, this case is a nice example of how even sensible regulation tends to degenerate over time into overreaching stupidity. A list of approved names, really?

Well children can change their names too. I would just insist someone call me something else if my parents had named me Yankee Rose. But, legally stop them???, Thats not the kind of abusive names I was talking about.

edit on 3-1-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:22 PM by SubTruth

Originally posted by RedmoonMWC

Mods if this is in the wrong section pleas move.

Really?
Is this what we in the U.S. and Canada are headed for?
A government agency telling us what we can and cannot name our children.
Anyone else uncomfortable with the State having this much say in your personal life?
I have no idea if this is connected with the UN Agenda 21 or not but in my humble opinion this is just wrong.

worldnews.nbcnews.com...
edit on 3-1-2013 by RedmoonMWC because: (no reason given)

As the progressives slowly tighten the grip of control slowly over time it will become clear. Many people who call themselves progressives don't even understand what the movement is all about.

The world needs to wake up and see these hate mongering control freaks for what they are. Apathy and comfort has allowed them a very good foot hold

Lucky for us the progressive mindset can not stand the test of time......it always crumbles from the inside out. They are weak of heart and pride. So in the end it will fail.

edit on 3-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:28 PM by ShaithisFerenczy

Originally posted by Nanocyte
I mean, if a parent wants to name their kid something like Pigvagina or Cockwaffle, it's undeniably in the best interest of the kid to force them to choose a different name, especially since the kid has no choice.

i just sprayed juice all over my screen :p thanks buddy hahaha

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:34 PM by Miccey

Originally posted by CaLyps0
reply to post by RedmoonMWC

Hell no f the government
I have the right to name my child anything i want
Its MY CHILD not theirs.

Yes
AND
No

As in Yes you produced and maybe even gave birth but after that
your RIGHTS ended. When the child is born you have ONLY obligations.
You have to basicly give YOUR life to the child, up to the time it can
rule for it´s own sake. Sure you dont have to give up every little aspect
of yourself, but maybe up to 75%. And if you can combine YOUR life
and the CHILDS then its a win win situation.

And thers NOTHING you can say to change these FACTS.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:35 PM by RedmoonMWC

Germany

If the office rejects your proposed baby name, you may appeal the decision. But if you lose, you’ll have to think of a different name. Each time you submit a name you pay a fee, so it can get costly.

Sweden

Enacted in 1982, the Naming law in Sweden was originally created to prevent non-noble families from giving their children noble names, but a few changes to the law have been made since then.

China

Most new babies in China are now basically required to be named based on the ability of computer scanners to read those names on national identification cards. The government recommends giving children names that are easily readable, and encourages Simplified characters over Traditional Chinese ones.

www.mentalfloss.com...

Personally I know people with all of these names: Brandy, Tallon, Nevyn, Mychaleigha, Savannah and Dakota
None of them have had any problems.

A friend of my Grand mother's had a last name of Katz, he named his Son Tom and his Daughter Kitty.
I have a friend named April Rose Winter. (Posted with permission)

My point is it is up to the parents what or what not to name their children, Not a government agency.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:45 PM by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by eXia7
It seems kind of harmless at first, but if you had tons of people with generic names like "boy or girl", could you imagine the logistical nightmare those types of names would cause for paper work?

You mean like what the average LEO or Border Patrol agent has to deal with when pulling over a van load of illegals in states like TX, NM, CA, AZ, or FL???

edit on 1/3/2013 by GoOfYFoOt because: spelling...

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 01:52 PM by Knobby

reply to post by RedmoonMWC

Apart from the Katz family ( who sound like a right bunch of porn stars) none of those names sound particularily disturbing. It's the freak-show names that have to be guarded against. I'm against the state interfering too much apart from telling them to get a grip.

I read somewhere that when he came of age, Zowie gave his dad a right good kicking every now and again on account of his name.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 04:20 PM by SilentKoala

Originally posted by RedmoonMWC
So you are all fine with the government doing this?
Sad state of affairs.

No, we are not all fine with this. Trolls just like to come out of the woodwork early...

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 04:37 PM by octotom

reply to post by MikeNice81

Americans want comfort and "security" over freedom.They have proven it time and again. I wouldn't be surprised if more than 60% of Americans would support an approved names registry.

Something like a "list of names" has absolutely nothing to do with comfort, security and freedom. It's a question of preventing people from doing stupid things that could be a detriment to their kids. Sure naming your kid Applesauce isn't (on the surface) the same as a pregnant woman chugging down a six pack, but naming your kid something stupid like that will set it on a path in life that could be bad for it.

Does my "freedom" to name my kid something stupid trump its right to be taken seriously in life?

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 04:45 PM by RedmoonMWC

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by MikeNice81

Americans want comfort and "security" over freedom.They have proven it time and again. I wouldn't be surprised if more than 60% of Americans would support an approved names registry.

Something like a "list of names" has absolutely nothing to do with comfort, security and freedom. It's a question of preventing people from doing stupid things that could be a detriment to their kids. Sure naming your kid Applesauce isn't (on the surface) the same as a pregnant woman chugging down a six pack, but naming your kid something stupid like that will set it on a path in life that could be bad for it.

Does my "freedom" to name my kid something stupid trump its right to be taken seriously in life?

In the same way that your freedom to have an aboution trumps "it's" right to live. Yes. As I have said before, it is the relatives and friends who generally speak up for the child in these situations.
Just so you know I am pro-life, but again the Government has no business in these choices.

edit on 3-1-2013 by RedmoonMWC because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 04:51 PM by sconner755

Originally posted by blackcube
All for it. These parents want name their child just for THEIR amusement, they thinking just for themselves and don't caring about their child. These type of parents should be denied the right to procreate because they are thinking that a children is more like a puppy than a human being.

Then of course you must oppose abortion too then?

These irresponsible parents should never be allowed to decide they don't want their puppy, right? The government must step in to protect the life of the child, right?

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 04:55 PM by Jess117

reply to post by RedmoonMWC

I wasn't aware of how many on here wouldn't mind having the government step into their personal lives. It sounds like a good idea at the time, but... I mean seriously, these are the people who created the so-called fiscal cliff and "avoided it". I think they have enough issues on their hands as it is.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 05:24 PM by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by Jess117
reply to post by RedmoonMWC

I wasn't aware of how many on here wouldn't mind having the government step into their personal lives. It sounds like a good idea at the time, but... I mean seriously, these are the people who created the so-called fiscal cliff and "avoided it". I think they have enough issues on their hands as it is.

And I thought I was the only one who recognized the "Hey! Look at what We did!" ruse, for what it was.....

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 05:34 PM by antonia

I don't get the arguments here. Did any of you read the article? The name isn't even remotely offensive. I don't understand why the government doesn't just let her use it.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 05:54 PM by RedmoonMWC

Originally posted by antonia
I don't get the arguments here. Did any of you read the article? The name isn't even remotely offensive. I don't understand why the government doesn't just let her use it.

Because that is not how a bureaucracy works, thay have to show that they are being paid for a valuable service.

Job security.

Besides, it is a control issue.

edit on 3-1-2013 by RedmoonMWC because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 05:58 PM by sconner755

Originally posted by antonia
I don't get the arguments here. Did any of you read the article? The name isn't even remotely offensive. I don't understand why the government doesn't just let her use it.

It's the psychology of a typical government employee. These people went to school, didn't get particularly good grades, weren't particularly clever, and got their jobs because of who they know.

Their rules and their ability to enforce their rules with a stoke of a pen is what gives them power. It's all about power and control.

And ironically, every regulation and law any of these overreaching governments enact is always enforced at the end of a gun. If you don't obey them, it will escalate until somebody with a gun shows up at your home and forces you to come with them.

reply posted on 3-1-2013 @ 06:25 PM by StareDad

reply to post by MikeNice81

Because children [in his class] speak a dead language and happen to know what his name translates too. This is a poor example.