• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tenn. judge changes infant's name from 'Messiah'

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

Well, no disrespect to the Dutch, but this is the United States of America where you can name your kid whatever the hell you want to name it... There is absolutely nothing wrong with the name that they chose for this child...

Not feeling disrespected. But I like our law that protects children from extreme names like commercial names like Coca-Cola/McDonalds/Microsoft or profanities.

And personally I feel the name is not right for a first name, as a second name I do not have an issue with it. But again, that is my personal opinion.
 
Hi Risky. Haven't seen you in a while. I have always liked your avatar.


Come on. You don't really mean that do you? Or are you just trying to pull our peter, Peter?
 
Even if you think that, her reason for doing it is offensive. She made it a religious issue.


Quite right, the government should have the duty and the right to protect it from parents who do not have the decency to give the child a name that does not make it bullied and ridiculed.

Messiah is not an suitable name for a child.
 
Even if you think that, her reason for doing it is offensive. She made it a religious issue.

I agree with you, religion should have been kept out of this court case.
 
I think she should be removed

When a Judge shows this kind of idiocy, the victim should be able to ask for an immediate removal of the Judge from office.
 
It's very similar in Germany. But I still think this judge was wrong according to American law, and because she made it a matter of defending her religious beliefs.

In America, some Neo Nazi guy named his son Adolf Hitler.


In the Netherlands people have to register their name at the local authority/city administration and the civil servant who is in charge of that registration can refuse to accept that name and the parent who does not agree with the decision of the civil servant can appeal that decision in front of the judge who can agree with either the city or the parents.

A lot of times the name will be allowed but for example a Dutch motivational speaker who is famous for his loud screaming of TSJAKKA wanted to call his daughter Tsjakkalotte and that was refused by the judge. Also the name Marieke Methadon was refused. Insulting combinations are sometimes also refused. A combination that would spell N.A.Z.I. can be refused. For example, if you call your child Nicholas Anthony Zacharias Isaac Johnson, spelled in short N.A.Z.I. Johnson than that would be refused by the civil servant and the judge.
 
Re: Tennessee Judge orders baby's name be changed from 'Messiah'

I do not live "where we ware mere subjects", I live "where we are free people living in a respectful society governed by laws" just like the US is governed by laws and the constitution.

UN convention on the rights of the child. The US may not have ratified it but has signed it.



This judge decided to take the child's best interest as her guideline. As said, another judge might change that decision but until then I do not see how this harms this child if it is called Martin for a short time in his life. There are worse things that can happen.



No, not at all----she did it on religious grounds and not the child,s best interest....
 
It's very similar in Germany. But I still think this judge was wrong according to American law, and because she made it a matter of defending her religious beliefs.

In America, some Neo Nazi guy named his son Adolf Hitler.

In Germany and the Netherlands that would have been forbidden, not because we do not love freedom but because we respect the memory of the more than 100,000 Dutch Jews that were massacred by that madman.
 
Re: Tennessee Judge orders baby's name be changed from 'Messiah'

No, not at all----she did it on religious grounds and not the child,s best interest....

And that is wrong, there is a separation between church and state for just these kinds of reasons.
 
I know. It's kind of weird. I don't see it as hating freedom either. I think Americans gloss over the negative aspects of their history.

They debate and fly the confederate flag, and argue the finer points of the civil war. Yeah, it wasn't all about slavery. The Nazi Party stood for more than war crimes, but Germany doesn't make light of any of it. There are way more memorials and dedications to the victims of war and genocide in Germany and I cannot name one in America for the natives and the families enslaved. Different attitudes towards history.

In Germany and the Netherlands that would have been forbidden, not because we do not love freedom but because we respect the memory of the more than 100,000 Dutch Jews that were massacred by that madman.
 
Hi Risky. Haven't seen you in a while. I have always liked your avatar.

Hey, fair lady. Thanks for the shout. It's good to see you as well. Every so often the fartwits on the board drive me completely batsh*t and I have to take a break for a bit. I'm slowly returning to the board more.

I much appreciate your compliment on my avatar. That's actually a very recent picture of me. ;)
 
Re: Tennessee Judge orders baby's name be changed from 'Messiah'

Well I'm not a christian, but as he was a Jew, I would think that it mattered quite a lot on what they called him...

He wasn't a jew, he was a judean. And no, not really. All versions of Jesus in either language are ok as long as you take an interest in learning about the guy and what he did and what he taught people.

And if you must attribute 1 name that matters, it should be Iesvs, his latin given name, because that's how he died for our sins.
 
I think she should be removed

I think she should be removed as well. But, don't hold your breath. It's rather ironic that Tennessee debated long and hard to pass a bill banning Sharia law in Tennessee. Earlier this year the Tennessee legislature went berserk when they discovered a low level porcelain sink in one of the state senate bathrooms.

"Holy Jesus! Earl, C.D., Jimbob, y'all got to come in here and look what's in the bathroom. Somebody done put in a Muslim foot bath! God a'mighty, them Muslims has gone too far. Next thing you know they'll be trying to marry our wimmens, 3 or 4 at a time. A friend of mine who went to Eye-rack for 8 months told me that them Muslim wimmen don't wear nothing under their dresses. They're stark nekkid under there. We can't let that happen to our wives and daughters and mothers. We may be too late. We already got a god dang Muslim foot bath in the legislative restroom! See, what happened 'cause we didn't pass that Sharia law ban?"


Well, it probably went something like that. It is true that they went crazy. The Tennessee legislature became unglued. They were outraged that there was a Muslim foot bath. Only when they calmed the hell down did someone finally officially inform them that it was for filling mop buckets and emptying dirty mop bucket water.

These idiots, the people who run the State of Tennessee are scared to death of Sharia law (and mop bucket sinks). But I'll bet you they won't move a finger to censure or even comment on the judge who has attempted to establish Christian law in the name of Tennessee.
 
Last edited:
And from what it looks like she cannot be sued for it.

No, but I'd think she could be removed from the bench pending judicial review.
 
"Holy Jesus! Earl, C.D., Jimbob, y'all got to come in here and look what's in the bathroom. Somebody done put in a Muslim foot bath! God a'mighty, them Muslims has gone too far. Next thing you know they'll be trying to marry our wimmens, 3 or 4 at a time. A friend of mine who went to Eye-rack for 8 months told me that them Muslim wimmen don't wear nothing under their dresses. They're stark nekkid under there. We can't let that happen to our wives and daughters and mothers. We may be too late. We already got a god dang Muslim foot bath in the legislative restroom! See, what happened 'cause we didn't pass that Sharia law ban?"

That sounds a lot like our own dear Texmex. :lol:
 
I think she should be removed as well. But, don't hold your breath. It's rather ironic that Tennessee debated long and hard to pass a bill banning Sharia law in Tennessee. Earlier this year the Tennessee legislature went berserk when they discovered a low level porcelain sink in one of the state senate bathrooms.

"Holy Jesus! Earl, C.D., Jimbob, y'all got to come in here and look what's in the bathroom. Somebody done put in a Muslim foot bath! God a'mighty, them Muslims has gone too far. Next thing you know they'll be trying to marry our wimmens, 3 or 4 at a time. A friend of mine who went to Eye-rack for 8 months told me that them Muslim wimmen don't wear nothing under their dresses. They're stark nekkid under there. We can't let that happen to our wives and daughters and mothers. We may be too late. We already got a god dang Muslim foot bath in the legislative restroom! See, what happened 'cause we didn't pass that Sharia law ban?"


Well, it probably went something like that. It is true that they went crazy. The Tennessee legislature became unglued. They were outraged that there was a Muslim foot bath. Only when they calmed the hell down did someone finally officially inform them that it was for filling mop buckets and emptying dirty mop bucket water.

These idiots, the people who run the State of Tennessee are scared to death of Sharia law (and mop bucket sinks). But I'll bet you they won't move a finger to censure or even comment on the judge who has attempted to establish Christian law in the name of Tennessee.

They also apparently don't understand the laws they presumably swore to uphold. It should be painfully obvious to anyone with any understanding our Constitution that Sharia law cannot take root here without an armed revolution.

Btw the judge is a magistrate judge - essentially an assistant judge who handles low level matters from what I gather. In Tennessee magistrate judges are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the judge who appointed them. She could be fired today if her superior so desired.
 
Yes, I get the point.

1. I like it that a judge had the guts to refuse a name that would assure bullying and ridicule for a child

2. I do not like the reasoning the judge used. She should have kept her religious feelings out of the court room

3. If they had not brought this case in front of the courts, the judge would not have had the opportunity to change the name

4. no matter how I feel about it now, the only recourse for the family is to appeal the verdict of this judge

5. the judge cannot be sued for her decision

1. BS
2. Yes.
3. The judge had NO BUSINESS changing the first name. The case was not about that.
4. Yes the judge has caused them to waste their time and money and tax payer money, again, BAD JUDGE.
5. The judge shouldn't be sued, the judge should be removed from the bench FOREVER.
 
Pardon the brevity but I'm getting off a train right now.

The government may not use religious tenants in adjudicating people's rights. See United States v Ballard.
I gather you're getting this from Volokh? It's not clear that the judge is making a "theological judgment" as per United States vs. Ballard. To me, she seems to be arguing that because the perception exists in the community, the name could cause unnecessary harm to the child. I don't know that I agree in this instance, but can certainly see how that reasoning might apply in other situations.

If she is in fact making two separate arguments, as Volokh suggests, I don't know why the religious question is even relevant because she would be acting outside her authority to interpret and apply the law. Whether or not she interpreted the law appropriately is not relevant when you're not interpreting a law to begin with.
 
Yes, I get the point.

1. I like it that a judge had the guts to refuse a name that would assure bullying and ridicule for a child

2. I do not like the reasoning the judge used. She should have kept her religious feelings out of the court room

3. If they had not brought this case in front of the courts, the judge would not have had the opportunity to change the name

4. no matter how I feel about it now, the only recourse for the family is to appeal the verdict of this judge

5. the judge cannot be sued for her decision
,
Any and every name can invite ridicule on a child. Every single one. I pointed out a few already that are very common names. Here are some more. "Carey me home", "Ben there, done that", "Name's Ben, Is your last name "Dover"?", "Martin the Martian". Children will tease children about anything. Using potential teasing as justification is simply wrong. Plus, you can't even prove that the a boy with the name Messiah is more likely to be teased than any other children for their names.
 
I gather you're getting this from Volokh? It's not clear that the judge is making a "theological judgment" as per United States vs. Ballard. To me, she seems to be arguing that because the perception exists in the community, the name could cause unnecessary harm to the child. I don't know that I agree in this instance, but can certainly see how that reasoning might apply in other situations.

If she is in fact making two separate arguments, as Volokh suggests, I don't know why the religious question is even relevant because she would be acting outside her authority to interpret and apply the law. Whether or not she interpreted the law appropriately is not relevant when you're not interpreting a law to begin with.

Yes. I'm a regular reader of Volokh's.

I thought about the "is she making a theological argument" angle for a while and concluded that she is because by invoking the Christian belief she is, I believe, lending it credence. I don't think the court can use theological belief as part of a decision without implicitly making a statement on court's view of the truthfulness of that belief. And that's plainly not allowed under Ballard.

On the other hand if she was doing as you say and simply talking about local perceptions she certainly worded it clumsily. I didn't get that sense from her statements as they were written in the article.
She didn't preface her comments with "There are alot of Christians in this community and they believe that Jesus is the messiah..." It sounded to me like a statement of fact though I haven't read the full text of her comments, only what was reported in the media.

I agree with you I'm not sure the perception issue matters in the case. I would go one step further and say I'm not sure I want judges to have that level of authority over parents at all.
 
I know people with last names like Dick and Kunt. I have never heard of judges forcing families to change.last names out of concern they will teased lol.



,
Any and every name can invite ridicule on a child. Every single one. I pointed out a few already that are very common names. Here are some more. "Carey me home", "Ben there, done that", "Name's Ben, Is your last name "Dover"?", "Martin the Martian". Children will tease children about anything. Using potential teasing as justification is simply wrong. Plus, you can't even prove that the a boy with the name Messiah is more likely to be teased than any other children for their names.
 
I know people with last names like Dick and Kunt. I have never heard of judges forcing families to change.last names out of concern they will teased lol.

I've known several people in the military with the last name "Cox". Plus, in the Navy, certain ratings are called "Seamen" as E-3s, including one of the ratings I went to nuke school with. We had Seaman Sampler, Seaman Tester, and Seaman Guzzler in the school just while I went through (they usually end up being girls that have these names). (One of the girls actually did request a new rate so she could be a Fireman rather than a Seaman due to the ridicule.)

But there absolutely are worse first names and particularly last names that a child could have. A judge has no place changing their name to something else (particularly their first name) just because they disapprove of the name. They absolutely need much more than simple disapproval or personal belief. What if some judge simply hates the names "John" or "Samantha", perhaps someone they knew with that name hurt them. Should that judge be allowed to arbitrarily change a child's name because of that? How about some judge in Topeka changing all children named "Fred" to something else due to Fred Phelps and how much bad publicity he and his organization has caused the area?
 
I know people with last names like Dick and Kunt. I have never heard of judges forcing families to change.last names out of concern they will teased lol.

same. I know people with last names like Pigg, Screws, Butts, etc.


race driver: Dick Trickle
hockey player: Ron Tugnutt
baseball players: Homer Bush, Johnny Dickshot, Dick Pole, Pete LaCock, Rusty Kuntz
football players: B.J. Johnson, Harry Colon, Lucious Pusey, Dick Butkus, DeCody Fagg
Russian skater: Irina Slutskaya
olympic swimmer: Misty Hyman
freesytle skier: Assol Slivets

and let's not forget my favorite NBA player ever..... John "Chubby" Cox.
 
I've known several people in the military with the last name "Cox". Plus, in the Navy, certain ratings are called "Seamen" as E-3s, including one of the ratings I went to nuke school with. We had Seaman Sampler, Seaman Tester, and Seaman Guzzler in the school just while I went through (they usually end up being girls that have these names). (One of the girls actually did request a new rate so she could be a Fireman rather than a Seaman due to the ridicule.)

But there absolutely are worse first names and particularly last names that a child could have. A judge has no place changing their name to something else (particularly their first name) just because they disapprove of the name. They absolutely need much more than simple disapproval or personal belief. What if some judge simply hates the names "John" or "Samantha", perhaps someone they knew with that name hurt them. Should that judge be allowed to arbitrarily change a child's name because of that? How about some judge in Topeka changing all children named "Fred" to something else due to Fred Phelps and how much bad publicity he and his organization has caused the area?

there are a couple of guys in my reserve unit whose last name is Major. one is an O4 and one is an E5. so we have Major Major and Sargeant Major. When I was at OBC, one of our instructors was Captain Kirk
 
Back
Top Bottom