Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The judge was being careful (and yes, I realize that he was a bit too careful in this case); someone could reasonably have made the claim that accepting the name 'Messiah' constituted a de facto government endorsement.
Besides, there are some places where it's legally acceptable to name your child 'Bull****' or 'Streetlight'.
I do not understand what you mean by the judge being careful. I thought the judge overstepped her powers and inserted a personal religious view into her ruling.
From the linked article:
Quote:
"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," the judge said.
That is the judge making a positive affirmation of Jesus as the one and only messiah and ruling that because of this, no one else is entitled to the name. That is unmistakably a government endorsement of a religious view. Would she make a congruent ruling for anyone attempting to name their child Mohammed?
Would she also rule that no one may be called "Caesar" because that was a title given to Roman emperors and the new born infant did not "earn" it? Can no one name their child "Duke" unless that child is actually a Duke? Shall we put the arm on bartenders who serve a concoction called a "Virgin Mary?" On NFL announcers who describe a desperation pass as a "Hail Mary?"
Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the ACLU of Tennessee said that a Tennessee judge should not have barred a couple from naming their child “Messiah.”
Weinberg said that Judge Ballew is free to hold religious beliefs. But that faith should remain private.
“She does not have the right to impose that faith on others,” said Weinberg. “And that is what she did.”
Anyway martin is a good name and if he goes to a half decent school he will prob learn who his patron saint is, St Martin DePorres declared Saint by Pope John XX111 naming him patron of all who work for social justice.
How do you know that the judge wasn't thinking of Martin Luther? Or Martin Sheen for that matter?
In New Zealand you can't have Messiah, Christ, Lucifer, Princess, or King, Knight or Bishop (maybe somebody likes chess?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander
How do you know that the judge wasn't thinking of Martin Luther? Or Martin Sheen for that matter?
I think the judge chose Martin because it is the mothers last name and so she combined the fathers and mothers surnames as the new name. Which seems bizarre to me in itself: What is your first name? Martin. What is your mothers surname? Martin. Huh?
The decision would of had nothing to do with what she calls imposing a belief on others and everything to do with giving a kid a name...that is workable socially without hinder in the culture to be lived in. ( well being.
a total goof in supposing a reason which has nothing to do with the developing well being of the kid...and completely tossed for some strange unknown reason.
Last edited by macpherson; 08-12-2013 at 02:39 PM..
A bad decision and one that will get her bench slapped
I also find it a bit funny that she had to go out of her way to address an issue that really wasn't on the table in order to protect this kid from potential abuse and difficulties in their largely Christian county.
We all know how insane a certain religion gets over their Mohommed, yet they all seem to be fine dealing with a name .... yet put someone named "Messiah" around a bunch of Christians and they will go double barrell on a young boy
It's like the judge is saying "we can't have you with that name, we all know how nuts these Christians get and it just wouldn't be safe for you"
This seems a striking clear violation of the first amendment. I cannot imagine that this ruling will stand. The judge in the case needs to be removed, or at least sent back for some basic instruction about the Bill of Rights.
Wasn't exactly a random decision. You should read the article.
"Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew ordered the name change last week, according to WBIR-TV . The boy's parents were in court because they could not agree on the child's last name".
Some people are so petty that when divorce comes they fight over their kid's name.
Judge aside, the parents should have been taken out and shot, both for poor judgment and terrible cruelty to their child.
You're kidding, right?
Parents have a right to name their kid anything they want.
If the kid doesn't like it, he can change his name when he reaches legal age.
Remember Sonny Bono and Cher naming their kid "Chastity?" Well, it's "Chaz" now ... who cares???
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. The boy's parents were in court because they could not agree on the child's last name".
