Yes, and there are modern Western countries who restrict various forms of speech all the time, like the case of the "approved names" list in Scandinavia. We are fortunate to have freedom of speech written into our Constitution.
Legal trivia: the fire/theater meme derives from Oliver Wendell Holmes's opinion in Schenck vs. US 1919. Interestingly, the speech that was being prevented was the distribution of pamphlets opposing the military draft. The decision was overturned in 1969- Brandenburg vs Ohio. So after 1969, presumably one could yell, "Fire!"
The "approved" names lists in Scandinavia, are a funny thing actually, as it is strictly not really adhered to, since all you have to do is ask for a name to be added to the list, and it will be added.
Around here the regulation of freedom is done by taxing just about anything you can think of, and pushing the "right" opinions as scientific truth.
So to have a reasonable degree of freedom here, you have to be relatively wealthy, and care to check up on the "information" the Danish state system hands out.
Magura
Actually if you give your kids a potentially dangerous name, you will call attention to your family. If solely for that reason children's services (or the local equivalent) try to take away the kids, then you would most likely expect the American Civil Liberties Union to take your case.
But posting a red flag and being bad parents is likely to result in a loss of custody.
The gray area is what is bad parenting.
Now if you had seen how news reporting works, then you might not want to speculate based solely on news reports.
You know there was a family court judge involved, kind of like the Texas family court judge videotaped beating his daughter. Too late for charges, but he may no longer be a family court judge.
There also are the cases of folks named Adolph before 1938, who in the US didn't really want to use that name much after then.
But posting a red flag and being bad parents is likely to result in a loss of custody.
The gray area is what is bad parenting.
Now if you had seen how news reporting works, then you might not want to speculate based solely on news reports.
You know there was a family court judge involved, kind of like the Texas family court judge videotaped beating his daughter. Too late for charges, but he may no longer be a family court judge.
There also are the cases of folks named Adolph before 1938, who in the US didn't really want to use that name much after then.
If true there would be little mobility between low, middle and high income cohorts of society. In fact while it is rare to move from the lowest to the highest income quintile, it is common for movement of 2 to 3 quintiles upward. Also it is not at all unusual for downward movement of a quintile or two.
Oxymoronic.
I tend to think this is mostly Jerry Springer-ish publicity stunt. Virtually all kids' birthday cakes are fine with "Happy Birthday Timmy," but this one apparently had to include his full name. In a truly free society, parents are free to choose baby names, and cake makers are free to refuse service.
Also, on the regulating thought theme, I am aware of current unConstitutional "hate crime" legislation.
I think the fundamental issue here is the difference in cultural approaches to free speech. In America, if you say something that offends someone, it's that someone's problem, not the person who said it in the first place. Likewise with naming. In Europe, and I assume other places, if you say something and someone else is offended, then it's your problem, not the one who was offended. We have free speech here in America. It's in the Constitution after all. Naming your kid C3PO or what have you is allowed, as should "Adolf Hitler" or whomever. It's not for us to judge the motives or intentions or consequences of what they name their children. When the child becomes an adult they change their name to something else anyway so what's the big deal?
Yeah, they could not take the kids based on the naming alone. That's the law. They can take them if there is domestic abuse and I would not be surprised if that was just some made up crap to give social services an excuse to take the kids from the parents.
It's got nothing to do with free speech.
It's about whether your choice exposes your child to distress, regardless of whether that distress is caused by an unconstitutional societal reaction. You can legislate for free speech but you can't legislate away people's reactions and you can't alleviate the child's distress by telling him that everybody's reaction to him is unconstitutional..
Any reasonable person could predict that it would make a child's life difficult in any society where the name carries the connotations that it does. That's why none of you would call your child Adolf Hitler regardless of any other consideration.
@kelticwizard.
Baloney. If it was Book of Kells then it would be kelltic, wouldn't it?
It's about whether your choice exposes your child to distress, regardless of whether that distress is caused by an unconstitutional societal reaction. You can legislate for free speech but you can't legislate away people's reactions and you can't alleviate the child's distress by telling him that everybody's reaction to him is unconstitutional..
Any reasonable person could predict that it would make a child's life difficult in any society where the name carries the connotations that it does. That's why none of you would call your child Adolf Hitler regardless of any other consideration.
@kelticwizard.
Baloney. If it was Book of Kells then it would be kelltic, wouldn't it?
Last edited:
You cannot in the US either, at least it is seriously prohibited by a corporate culture. Also I saw a couple of nude beaches in the US Sandy Hook and Long Island Albert Moses Park.
Never saw nude person in the middle of street in Europe in a crowded public place but saw US Nude Cowbow MidTown Manhattan. He was partly nude however.
So stereotypes are not true always.
Regarding names in Europe I believe it is strictly related to Christian culture historically. At leas most names here in Russia are picked up from very limited set despite the fact that Birth Records are not carried by Church anymore almost a Century. But if parents are crazy enough they are free to came up with some truly spectacular aukwardness like one boy was called "Yuravkosura" wich basicly means "Yuri Gagarin in Space. Excitment". Poor boy.
I would be surprised. "Social Services" is so often cast as the villain it's become a tired old cliche. My mother worked for years for Child Protective Services as regional supervisor over a vast area. The stories run from sad to horrific. There are many unfit parents out there - a small minority of the total, to be sure, but the numbers are still high. The biggest problem is not abuse, but neglect. Three or four small children left home alone, dirty and hungry all day is the most common case.
The social workers don't have to look for excuses. Bad parents provide all that is needed.
So by the same reasoning, if you and your child move into a neighborhood and you both get attacked because you are the "wrong" color, the state should take your child away because you "exposed the child to distress" since you knew some people in the neighborhood might get upset?
Have you actually thought this out?
Last edited:
Yeah, I've thought this out, unlike some here who seem to think it's some kind of cute variation on Johnny Cash's 'Boy Named Sue'.
That's Cash BTW, not Kash.
Thread closed, topic has veered far from acceptable forum discussion. (Too political)- Status
- Not open for further replies.