Judge Orders Baby's Name Changed.

[arnisador]

[h=1]Tennessee Judge orders baby's name be changed from 'Messiah'[/h] [h=6][/h]

A Newport mother is appealing a court's decision after a judge ordered her son's name be changed from "Messiah."
[...]
Judge Ballew ordered the 7-month-old's name be "Martin DeShawn McCullough." It includes both parent's last names but leaves out Messiah.

"The word Messiah is a title and it's a title that has only been earned by one person and that one person is Jesus Christ," Judge Ballew said.

Once again, an example of how the religious think everyone else in this country should be forced to live by their standards. They outlaw Sharia law, then do something like this. Incidentally, as to this and other 'titles' as names:

[h=2]“Messiah” is increasingly popular as name for U.S. boys[/h]

Messiah was the fourth fastest-growing name for boys, rising to 387th in 2012 from the 633th spot in 2011, according to the federal agency.

King became the seventh fastest-growing boy’s name, reaching the 256th most popular spot in 2012, compared with 389th the year before, the agency said.

[...]
The name Major ranked as the fastest-growing boy’s name on the SSA list, jumping to 483rd most popular in 2012 from 988th in 2011.


“I have no doubt Major’s rising popularity as a boy’s name is in tribute to the brave members of the U.S. military, and maybe we’ll see more boys named General in the future,” Carolyn Colvin, acting commissioner of the SSA, said in a statement.

I once had a South American student whose first name was 'Colonel'.

 

[ballen0351]

How did it get to court anyway?

 

[billc]

One nut doesn't make a difference. However, the secular progressives judges who ruled that the secular government can take your property and sell it to someone who will make the government more tax money...now that is a real problem. The secular government minions who used the government to go after conservative and religious groups, you know that IRS scandal the secular media is ignoring, that is also a bigger problem than this one nut judge.

 

[granfire]

King?
You call a horse king...not a kid...

Messiah?
Lord Almighty (or was that his father)

what theF is wrong with NAMES...
I know, Marshal Faulk, Marquis Grissom....

But what is rather amazing in a bad way, that it is a fast growing name for boys...
But I guess if you want to go religious and Caleb and Joshua are too over used for you....
what's wrong with Noah, or the other thousands of names in the Good Book...
Do other than Hispanics call their boys Jesus?

 

[arnisador]

How did it get to court anyway?

The dispute was actually over picking a surname, but the judge found the first name objectionable too. The parents don't appear to be winners but the judge's reasoning is just clearly disallowed under the First Amendment.

 

[granfire]

The dispute was actually over picking a surname, but the judge found the first name objectionable too. The parents don't appear to be winners but the judge's reasoning is just clearly disallowed under the First Amendment.

yeah, up to that point he had a sensible argument...then he tossed the religion thing around...

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Flip side of argument:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ghting-custody-adolf-hitler-article-1.1367217

Last I knew the US didn't have any name laws. Other countries do.
Judge is wrong here. (in the OP)

 

[ballen0351]

Funny how judges being wrong is a fair game until the topic is Roe v Wade then Judges never get it wrong

 

[Touch Of Death]

King?
You call a horse king...not a kid...

Messiah?
Lord Almighty (or was that his father)

Chris and Messiah mean the same thing.

 

[arnisador]

Funny how judges being wrong is a fair game until the topic is Roe v Wade then Judges never get it wrong

Big difference: This judge is violating the First Amendment, whereas Roe v. Wade interprets the 14th Amendment. Even if you disagree with that interpretation, one decision is going against the constitution while the other is based on going with it.

 

[Tgace]

How did it get into court in the first place? Who "reported" them?

 

[Tgace]

How did it get into court in the first place? Who "reported" them?

Found it:

http://www.wivb.com/dpps/news/offbeat/tenn-judge-changes-infants-name_6626199

The boy's parents were in court because they could not agree on the child's last name, but when the judge heard the boy's first name, she ordered it changed, too.

While I don't "like" the choice of name...I don't think it's the gvts role to get involved in naming children.

 

[oftheherd1]

Tennessee Judge orders baby's name be changed from 'Messiah'




Once again, an example of how the religious think everyone else in this country should be forced to live by their standards. They outlaw Sharia law, then do something like this. Incidentally, as to this and other 'titles' as names:

“Messiah” is increasingly popular as name for U.S. boys



I once had a South American student whose first name was 'Colonel'.

You are entitled to your opinions of course. But you paint with too broad a brush. I would consider myself religious. I consider myself a Christian. I don't think others should be forced to live by my standards. That in fact, would be against my religion.

In the case you mention, I am sure the parents will win on the appeal the news stated they have filed. I would not name a child of mine Messiah, nor Adolf Hitler. But I don't know of any law against it. I cannot imagine what the judge in this case was thinking when she made the ruling. She had to realize she was bringing her understanding of her religion into a civil legal matter.

I don't think her decision comports with law. Unfortunately, it gives some people a reason to lump all who call themselves Christians, together with those who follow non-Christian practices.

 

[arnisador]

While I don't "like" the choice of name...I don't think it's the gvts role to get involved in naming children.

I agree on both parts...but while there may be times when the govt. renaming a child is reasonable, like if someone named a child the 189,819 letter long chemical name of titin, doing so because the name offends your personal interpretation of your religion is flat-out unconstitutional.

 

[ballen0351]

Big difference: This judge is violating the First Amendment, whereas Roe v. Wade interprets the 14th Amendment. Even if you disagree with that interpretation, one decision is going against the constitution while the other is based on going with it.

You proved my point. Judges is wrong when interpretation of 1st but couldnt possibly be wrong about the 14th.

In this case I agree the judge was wrong. The parents are idiots for going to court and not acting like adults and picking a name in the first place. If they can't even pick a name its going to be a long 18 years for them.

 

[granfire]

I agree on both parts...but while there may be times when the govt. renaming a child is reasonable, like if someone named a child the 189,819 letter long chemical name of titin, doing so because the name offends your personal interpretation of your religion is flat-out unconstitutional.

Somebody should have stepped up and slapped the parents of two girls named after STDs...
Somewhere there should be a child abuse clause....

 

[ballen0351]

Somebody should have stepped up and slapped the parents of two girls named after STDs...
Somewhere there should be a child abuse clause....

STD? Never seen that one.

 

[oftheherd1]

I agree on both parts...but while there may be times when the govt. renaming a child is reasonable, like if someone named a child the 189,819 letter long chemical name of titin, doing so because the name offends your personal interpretation of your religion is flat-out unconstitutional.

Doesn't that line of thought cause you problems? What gives the government the right to pick and choose what names (if the reasoning isn't based on a particular religious belief?) a parent will choose to give their child? That the government doesn't like it, or finds it inconvenient, isn't a consideration in a parent's privilege to choose their child's name. Actions that are not controlled nor prohibited by law are privileges.

For that matter, what makes this a 1st amendment issue rather than a 14th amendment issue? The judge isn't congress, and although the judge stated her reason was religious, what her reason in fact did, was "... abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ..." and "... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. ..." Letting you or me pick our child's name, but not those parents, is denying them equal protection.

It is only a 1st amendment issue if the parents aren't really naming their child to give him a name, but making a statement.

 

[granfire]

STD? Never seen that one.

Gonorrhea....
school teachers can give you a list of outrageous and plum ridiculous names these kids run around with.
I suppose mother wanted to commemorate her conception....the De's and La's don't even register as weird anymore in that context.
Seriously, there should be a law preventing kids having to go through the first and most important years of their lives with a stupid name. Normal names cause enough trouble as it is! Rare names put a bullseye on your back. But going spechul like that?! Child abuse!

 

[arnisador]

You proved my point.

Only if your point is that you oppose the existence of the judicial system.