I feel like there was already a topic for this, but if there is I couldn't find it, so here it goes.

Read this.

What is your opinion on this? Should the government be allowed to determine what names we can and cannot use? I feel like it is overstepping their bounds a little bit to do that, but at the same time I feel bad for kids who are getting saddled with names like Anal and V8. Sure the kid can change it when he's old enough, but how long does he have to live with that unfortunate moniker before he can? Kids will bully someone for a name that sounds remotely like any form of dirty word, so someone actually named Anal would probably take a lot of abuse. It is possible that naming a child something like that will be causing harm to the child, and if so the government should step in. The thing is, how do you determine the effects of a certain name on a child? How can we figure out whether or not the name Anal would lead someone to an unhappy life? We can assume that such a name will get a kid bullied, but is that enough to warrant infringing on the freedom of expression? The truth is, I don't really know the answer to any of the questions. This is a vast gray area at this point. The fact that we even have parents trying to name their kids weird things like this is pretty sad in and of itself. We shouldn't have to deal with an issue like this because parents should be able to find a way to give their child a unique name without calling them Anal or V8.

As for names like Christ and Lucifer, I could care less about these names. Parents should not be limited in their choices by a religion. Lucifer is actually a pretty cool name if you ask me. If you want to be funny(please do NOT make your naming decisions on the basis of being funny) you could name a kid Satan Christ insert last name here. But really, no one is being harmed because a kid has the name Christ or Lucifer, so I see no reason to ban them.

It's not a matter of freedom , some ppl can get offended with those names.... Satan for exemple.... But for me they shouldn't be banned 2... Edit: i just found out that there's a guy here in brazil named facebookson and another in UK named Potato xD

Wow, the government really do want to take away every shred of freedom we have left don't they. This is just getting ridiculous now. Getting offended by someone's name is just plain stupid.

Here's my opinion :3 Parent names their child anal understanding why that might cause trouble, their child go's through school being bullied and gets depressed and so on, the parents have then committed child abuse. Child abuse is a no no, so the government can step in to stop this.

As you said, I don't really think names like Christ and Lucifer should be banned. I mean.. just because it has likeness to a religious figure doesn't make it a 'taboo' name.

I do think names should be monitored for things like profanity, and dirtiness because honestly it can get pretty ridiculous.
In the past year, I met a person named la-a. Pronounced La'dash'a. And a guy named 'Fuhquan' pronounced.. well, I'm sure you get the point.

Imo, if you name your kid something stupid like that, you don't deserve to raise a child as you still need proper raising yourself.

It should be banned because there is no normal man who would name his/her kid by names like that...

My answer is simple, although people might disagree with me due to biased reasons: banning certain names is unconstitutional, regardless of the opposite arguments (such as the ones presented, stating that the child might face bullying or not).

The reason for that is simple: you're incurring on one of the basic human rights, which is freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is only abolished upon causing impacts on other's health (e.g. - smoking on public places) or if you're incurring on a hate crime. Now, please come back to the case in hand - unless the kid is named "Jews Sucks" or "White Power", you're not incurring on any of those restrictions whatsoever. Therefore, the guidelines for freedom of speech still apply.

Now, some might say: what about the bullying faced by this child on school, for example? Well, well, well, my little friends, remember that this serves only as a display of the short-mindness of the agressor on itself - the culpability does not lie on the name-creator nor on the name-bearer, but on the offender himself. Preventing one of bestowing the name of their choice upon their child is just a way to punish one for other's misdeeds - which is not fair, from any standpoint, at all.

So, you might question: what if the child does not like that name? Well, there comes the second part of it: I defend the free changing of names, phenomena that is not present on a lot of countries except on certain circumstances (e.g. - there was a guy named "1 2 3 de Oliveira 4" here on Brazil - due to that, his name was allowed to be changed, because it was considered as demeaning, but I wouldn't able to change mine if I wanted to). If one is going to be called by that manner throughout his or her whole life, why not allowing them the choice of choosing how they want to be called? It is rather logical, if you part from the right train of thought.

In a nutshell: no forbidden names. Allow names to be changed by the bearer, as long as the taxes for the documentation and information changes is paid by the one that wills to change his/her own name. Still, the initial premise stands: disallowing a certain name by inputting it on a governmental "forbidden" list is downright despicable and breaches what is stated by the tenets of freedom of speech as we currently know.

Aggree with Taylor. As Anonymous say: no matter what are you doing, you're free and you can do whatever you want. That's why Anons work - if you name your son Anal, suppose that he might want to change his name. Because children are free too. No forbidden names = moere creativity AND feeling of freedom.
Btw, I really like how does it work in Japan (kanji names). Everything should have its meaning, feel free to make a good use of that.

As you said, I don't really think names like Christ and Lucifer should be banned. I mean.. just because it has likeness to a religious figure doesn't make it a 'taboo' name.

I do think names should be monitored for things like profanity, and dirtiness because honestly it can get pretty ridiculous.
In the past year, I met a person named la-a. Pronounced La'dash'a. And a guy named 'Fuhquan' pronounced.. well, I'm sure you get the point.

Imo, if you name your kid something stupid like that, you don't deserve to raise a child as you still need proper raising yourself.

this is why kids need to stop having sex. Because they are too immature.

what about the bullying faced by this child on school, for example? remember that this serves only as a display of the short-mindness of the agressor on itself - the culpability does not lie on the name-creator nor on the name-bearer, but on the offender himself. Preventing one of bestowing the name of their choice upon their child is just a way to punish one for other's misdeeds - which is not fair, from any standpoint, at all.

I disagree, naming your kid anal shows the immaturity and short sightedness of the parent. kids will be kids no matter what part of the world you are from and in naming your child anal you are giving an open invite for your child to be bullied. I'm sure your aware the early stagfes of a childs life are crucial in development and can set out how the rest of their lifes pan out (not going to delve into the whole social psychology aspect) and with a name like anal you will be setting your kid up to grow negative thoughts, feelings, behaviours, low self esteem e.t.c. now i know your gonna jump on my back about that being a fallacy but seriously you'd be a fool to disagree that it will at least have a more negative impact in the majority if not not all cases...)

I agree with you on the name changing bit...

p.s. i had a nepalese friend called anil when i was in school and everyone used to call him anal!

Can you even name your child anal? I think not.
Why miss so much fun?
No, they should not ban names. At least they make me lmfao.

(...)

this is why kids need to stop having sex. Because they are too immature.

Why? Sex is healthy, haven't you heard that yet? It makes you more fit.
Also, I don't believe the age of consent should be 16, as opposed to some people. Let's start it earlier, like, at 15 years of age. Why not?
Sex ought not to be a taboo, as it's something we all know of and should drive home to people. Sex is sex, and kids aren't immature.
There is no limit as to how many times you are allowed to have sexual intercourse; what's more, I'm of the opinion that it would just be great to make people finally understand how delightful it really is.

(...)

I disagree, naming your kid anal shows the immaturity and short sightedness of the parent. kids will be kids no matter what part of the world you are from and in naming your child anal you are giving an open invite for your child to be bullied. I'm sure your aware the early stagfes of a childs life are crucial in development and can set out how the rest of their lifes pan out (not going to delve into the whole social psychology aspect) and with a name like anal you will be setting your kid up to grow negative thoughts, feelings, behaviours, low self esteem e.t.c. now i know your gonna jump on my back about that being a fallacy but seriously you'd be a fool to disagree that it will at least have a more negative impact in the majority if not not all cases...)

I agree with you on the name changing bit...

p.s. i had a nepalese friend called anil when i was in school and everyone used to call him anal!

As you already guessed, I have an objection. You stated, and I quote: "In naming your child anal you are giving an open invite for your child to be bullied."

This, by itself, is a statement that proves my initial premise - that the responsibles for this phenomena are the bullies, instead of the parents. Surely, one might argue that this was a result of the parents' disregard of the current society, STILL, you need to also remember that we're dealing here with an idealization - I'm trying to display what would be the best course of action, logically speaking, and not discoursing on how the situation currently is. This is what renders this whole observation as dissonant from what I've proposed. I'm exactly stating that there should be a change on the people's mindset, so the world can reach the logical ground I've proposed, instead of relying on preemptive, senseless measures as displayed beforehand.

Can you even name your child anal? I think not.
Why miss so much fun?
No, they should not ban names. At least they make me lmfao.


(...)
Why? Sex is healthy, haven't you heard that yet? It makes you more fit.
Also, I don't believe the age of consent should be 16, as opposed to some people. Let's start it earlier, like, at 15 years of age. Why not?
Sex ought not to be a taboo, as it's something we all know of and should drive home to people. Sex is sex, and kids aren't immature.
There is no limit as to how many times you are allowed to have sexual intercourse; what's more, I'm of the opinion that it would just be great to make people finally understand how delightful it really is.

Hmm, Rukia, sorry to break it to you, but not all of the countries bear 16 as the age of consent. The age of consent here in Brazil is 18 - if one has sex with anyone under that age, even if the relation is consensual, they will be incurring on statutory rape. Unfortunately, we did not reach the governmental maturity level that you've proposed. People are massified by their age and, I dare say, they will always be, sadly enough.

Why? Sex is healthy, haven't you heard that yet? It makes you more fit.
Also, I don't believe the age of consent should be 16, as opposed to some people. Let's start it earlier, like, at 15 years of age. Why not?
Sex ought not to be a taboo, as it's something we all know of and should drive home to people. Sex is sex, and kids aren't immature.
There is no limit as to how many times you are allowed to have sexual intercourse; what's more, I'm of the opinion that it would just be great to make people finally understand how delightful it really is.

Actually there are some countries that have lower age of consent. In Japan the age of consent is 13 years old though some prefectures have special laws that state the age of consent is 18. In my opinion maturity can't be measured by age alone. I mean I'm already 21 and I'm still immature. As for the naming issue I think the parents should at least be investigated if they intend to name their child anal. A name can mean a lot to a person and the bullying aside if the child understands that her name means something terrible it might cause the child to question the love of his/her parents. They can interpret it as their parents not wanting them and that is one of the worst things someone can do to a child.