[identity profile] bunnsidhe.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] babynames
I mentioned in my intro post that I currently live in Scandinavia. In Denmark there is an acceptable list of baby names. This means you are not allowed to name your child a name not on the list without approval (I believe this goes for odd spellings, too). The list has been relaxed somewhat because of immigration of non-Scandinavians into Denmark--but your best bet is to prove the name is significant to your religion or culture. So no Moon Units. Actually, my mother-in-law told me her parents were not allowed to name her sister Mia back around 1960.

Do you think this is a good idea so kids don't end up with cruel names?
Page 1 of 3 << [1] [2] [3] >>

Date: 2006-06-29 12:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] turabiannights.livejournal.com
It used to be I'd recoil at the thought of the government monitoring what people named their kids... but ever since Precious, Princess, Messiah, Talon, Cannon, Marquis, Essence, Sincere, Karma, Miracle, Armani and Chanel made the top 1000 in the US... yeah, I think I wouldn't mind a little government monitoring. Restrictions would have to be extremely loose. Family names would have to be 100% okay, even if they were doofy. I'd be fine if they just outlawed suggestive names. Sexana? Ryder? Asslyn? Check. And there should be a list of words that are not okay to name a kid, like they have in Japan. Seven? Um, no. Cutter? Nah. Maison? Mm, no.

Wishful thinking, though. Everyone would get all cranky about it here in the U.S., and someone would probably bribe someone to approve Messiah or Precious.

Date: 2006-06-29 01:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bellisima87.livejournal.com
I live in Germany and here it is the same.
That's why there are no Pilot Inspectors, Fifi Trixibells or Apples in Germany, I guess.

Date: 2006-06-29 01:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] solyma.livejournal.com
as stupid as some names can be, i think parents should be able to name their children what they want.

Date: 2006-06-29 01:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ashadelic.livejournal.com
I don't honestly think something like that would ever fly in the US. However, I don't think it would be a bad idea as long as it was well regulated. I mean... some of the names parents make their kids grow up with... it's just cruel and unusual punishment.

Personally, before they start to regulate what to NAME children, they should develop a plan for who should be allowed to HAVE them *grin*

Date: 2006-06-29 01:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mrsduryee.livejournal.com
I'd say that a rule like that would go against some pretty fundamental freedoms we have here in the US, including the freedom to raise our own children. I don't think the government has any place restricting (unharmful) family practices, whether they are religious, naming, traditional or cultural in nature.

Plus, as Shakespeare pointed out a long time ago, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet...and we are completely free to create our own nicknames, go by our middle names, or even legally change our names, as some in this community (who I am sure have really normal names they just don't like) have done.

Date: 2006-06-29 02:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tigress-oils.livejournal.com
It's one of the creepiest things I've ever heard of, and I'm pretty far left-leaning and have considered living in Scandinavia (Norway).

I'm sure my favorite names wouldn't be on the list.

Date: 2006-06-29 02:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] thunderofsins.livejournal.com
Thats kinda very scary! Maybe it had good intentions, but no.

If kids end up with "cruel names" they can deal with it till their an adult and then spite their parents by changing their name to the most boring mundane normally spelled name they can think of.

Besides...who is to say what is cruel. I'd hate if it my parents had named me Cherish Grace, but the girl I know with that name loves it. You never know!

Date: 2006-06-29 02:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ladyartemisa.livejournal.com
yeah thats how I feel.

eventhough the idea kind of doenst go along with my beliefs, if I see one more person naming their kid UR Hiness I am going to explode.

Date: 2006-06-29 02:30 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ladyartemisa.livejournal.com
yes, yes they did.

Date: 2006-06-29 02:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ladyartemisa.livejournal.com
it was a her and it was supposed to be lke "Your Highness" but they made it look cool. i dont know what they call her.. its sad though, very sad.

Date: 2006-06-29 03:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lostrocket.livejournal.com
I partially agree because there are some truly horrible names, and I feel bad for those kids. But I think the big flaw is not everyone agrees on everything that is acceptable or not...for example, I have no problem with Ryder and Seven. I think calling "Ryder" suggestive is a bit more of a stretch than Sexana and Asslyn. Seven's not my style but I think it's cool.

If there were limits, I think they would have to be very very loose, but unfortunately that would lead to problems of interpretation. And culturally I don't think it's a good fit with America...people would start suing the government left and right for the right to name their kid whatever they wanted.

Date: 2006-06-29 03:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anapology.livejournal.com
No! I think that's a silly old fashioned rule.. lists of names, i'd move!
Although i hate stupid spellings/crazy names- i do pity future Kloie's & Ehlerr's- they should be banned! It's just, where do you draw the line between something a little out of the ordinary like Stefani compared to the above names. You can't really.. so i guess you shouldnt have a ban in place.

Date: 2006-06-29 03:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anapology.livejournal.com
This was so funny!
McKaty for a girl, ohhh lord!

Date: 2006-06-29 03:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mrsduryee.livejournal.com
Where can you see this list? I'd be interested to see the "strangest" name on the list

In some places I could see Biblical names going on that list because of "separation of church and state." Some governments want to remove the Bible from society so badly I wouldn't put it past them.
Page 1 of 3 << [1] [2] [3] >>
Page generated Jan. 26th, 2026 12:11 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios