Messiah no more - baby gets a new name

Kyriakos

Creator
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Messages
74,555
Location
The Dream
http://news.yahoo.com/tenn-judge-changes-infants-name-messiah-215423538.html

yahoo hosted article said:
NEWPORT, Tenn. (AP) — A judge in Tennessee changed a 7-month-old boy's name to Martin from Messiah, saying the religious name was earned by one person and "that one person is Jesus Christ."

Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew ordered the name change last week, according to WBIR-TV (http://on.wbir.com/1cDOeTY). The boy's parents were in court because they could not agree on the child's last name, but when the judge heard the boy's first name, she ordered it changed, too.

"It could put him at odds with a lot of people and at this point he has had no choice in what his name is," Ballew said.

The boy's mother, Jaleesa Martin, of Newport, said she will appeal. She says Messiah is unique and she liked how it sounded alongside the boy's two siblings — Micah and Mason.

"Everybody believes what they want so I think I should be able to name my child what I want to name him, not someone else," Martin said.

I can see the point in thinking such a name would probably cause problems to the child, not set it apart in any beneficial way.

Messiah is indeed a very specific title, given it means the one who intervenes on account of someone (man/mankind) towards someone else (god).
I am sure there have been other weird names for babies, i heard of some of them (North West?), but this was a bad choice too and i hope the baby keeps a normal name.

You can discuss, if you feel like it, the issue of unusual baby names, if they are detrimental or not, and so on.
 
I knew a guy at my old workplace whose first name included a "Sir" so you always had to address him as "Sir <First Name>"--putting a title in someone's name isn't exactly new even if it is still uncommon. I'm a bit unclear, did the parents pick Martin as a backup name or did the judge choose that unilaterally (as is implied in the quote)?
 
I think the judge picked it, probably influenced by the fact that it was too a name starting with M (which is the motif with the children in that family) and that the mother's surname is also Martin (which may be pronounced differently than Martin though).
 
Why not Mahdi?
 
^ It seems that the "Mahdi" is not an actual god, but some sort of temporary (final) ruler of the world, in the few years before the judgement day. And most people from non-islamic countries would likely not know at all what that name signifies (i didn't either, wiki'd it).
 
I'm partially conflicted: though I think parents, not judges, should have ultimate discretion over what their children are named, my contempt for 'unique' names, from odd spellings to names that are not names ("Princess") is stronger than my libertarian principles. Alas.

It's as if parents have absorbed the ethos of the consumerist market, that every child must have its own brand.
 
Yeah why did the judge get to change her first name if that wasn't in question?
 
Because they can. Power corrupts and nobody has more power in our system than judges, so they get it in their minds that they can do whatever the hell they want... and they're right, they can.
 
Silly. There are no laws on the books regarding first names, obviously, given all the stupid things kids are named these days.

Either have such a law, like Germany does, or allow people to name their kids whatever they want, unless it includes something overly offensive. I hope these guys win their court case even though I don't really like the name they went with... It *is* a million times better than La-a (ladasha) or blanket
 
It calls into question what "Lu Ann" actually means.
 
Yeah, this is silly. Jesus, Chris, Mohammed, etc are fine, but Messiah isn't?

Not really sure if that point is valid though:

-Christ (as in the slav name, or the greek 'Christos') is not the same as the term for Christ in either languages (not utterly sure about the whole slavic ones). In Greek, for example, Christ (son of god) is termed &#935;&#961;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#972;&#962;, whereas the first name related to him is &#935;&#961;&#942;&#963;&#964;&#959;&#962;. Not only they have a slightly different spelling, but they are pronounced differently.

-Jesus (the latin pronounced name) might be also different from the spanish term in some way (i don't know, just asking ;) )

-Mohammed is not the name of a deity. Likewise there are plenty of people called by names of christian prophets.

However there seem to be cases where other names for the triadic christian deity are used as common first names. For example Emmanuel is another name very related to god, which is why the (many) Byzantine emperors who were named that were called "Manuel" so as to display a lesser state than god. I suspect though that the actual connection between such names as Emmanuel, with the deity, is not at all pronounced, unlike with the term Messiah which is obviously in very common use.
 
Your kid isn't a fashion accessory. You shouldn't have the right to burden him or her with a problemsome name.
 
It's all small government until someone offends Christians.
 
I think the judge picked it, probably influenced by the fact that it was too a name starting with M (which is the motif with the children in that family) and that the mother's surname is also Martin (which may be pronounced differently than Martin though).

Losing your ability to name your child because the judge said so is kind of a big infringement on their personal liberties, even if some names are agreed to be off limits.

It's all small government until someone offends Christians.

Yup. Currently googling around to see if anybody has named their kid 'Yahweh' or something like that.
 
I agree that it won't work having a name just because a judge ruled it so, but maybe it was just meant as a temporary decision, mostly so as to make the parents actually change the name from messiah. So most probably they can easily change the name to some other, that they like and is not deemed as a "bad idea" for the child's own prospects in life.

The article does note that the community of the child is heavily christian, which seems to be enough of a reason to deem it probable he will be met with less positivity than would be the case without having this sort of name.
 
Top Bottom