|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Mar 21, 2009 23:00:54 GMT
YES!! I got 2nd again! Out of five (one more than the last time I posted)! I beat gay-marriage girl #1. So not the one that beat me last post, the one before that (#2 was not there, but I'm sure I would have beat her, too!). Mwah-ha-ha. I'm totally going to dominate this season.
|
|
|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Mar 29, 2009 0:44:04 GMT
((sobs)) This season sucks. Ok, it doesn't. I had sub-sections today. To advance to sections, you need to get fourth or higher. I got second. Out of for contestants. ((sighs)) I hated my first round judge! He told me that my topic wasn't an important issue! That's the first time anyone's EVER told me that! Grg. Oh, the next post is my speech, in case you're interested. It's pretty stupid just reading it, but I think it's okay to listen to. I've been doing pretty decent with it, after all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stacey Morgan on Mar 29, 2009 0:59:54 GMT
C'mon... I'm cirtainly interested!
|
|
|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Mar 29, 2009 1:35:12 GMT
"Talula Does the Hula from Hawaii? Present. Sex Fruit? Here. Keenan Got Lucy? Yeah Detroit? Here and here."
Confused? That's understandable. Would a teacher ever have need to call out such bizarre names during an attendance check? You wouldn't think so, but those names have all been given to real children in New Zealand. Luckily for the children, the names have all been changed under a court order, and the names are now illegal to give a child born in New Zealand.
A sigh of relief to the children of the world, right? Well, no. The United States has no names that are illegal to give children. Why is this a problem? After all, most of the names we hear today are relatively normal, and the weird names we do hear are often the result of the person changing his or her name later in life. But there are people today who will name their children things that most people would find completely absurd--or even offensive--and that can cause negative long term affects.
There are only a few laws in the United States governing how to name a child or how to bestow a new name upon yourself. The only laws are that the name can't be intentionally confusing (such as a number), a vulgar word that could induce fighting (including racial slurs), or in the case of renaming yourself: be used with fraudulent intent (such as skipping out on unpaid debts) or be someone else's name for the intent of misuse.
America needs better laws, because these laws are very ambiguous. One problem is that none of the laws prevent ridiculous names. And while one of the laws does say you cannot have or give a name that could induce fighting--which prevents curse words--it does not prevent a name that is illegal in most of Europe: Adolf Hitler.
Though some would think "Adolf Hitler" is dangerously close to a racial slur, it was not close enough to stop Heath and Deborah Campbell from bestowing the moniker to their now three year-old son. Adolf Hitler Campbell had his third birthday last year, but he was not able to celebrate it with a birthday cake from ShopRite, a grocery store in Holland Township. As Karen Meleta, a representative from the store, told Express-Times: "We believe the request to inscribe a birthday wish to Adolf Hitler is inappropriate."
The Campbells seem to think that Adolf Hitler is a perfectly adequete name to give a child. Perhaps they gave it with no malicious intent, but when a grocery store will not inscribe a name on a birthday cake, parents need to stop thinking about being creative or making a statement, and start thinking about how the name will portray them and their child.
In general, baby names actually reflect the parent more than they do the child. Tyler Cabot of The Atlantic did a study comparing popular Caucasion children's names from high- and low-educated mothers. Not a single name from the low-educated list made it to the high-educated list. As mothers become more creative with baby names, and as celebrities such as Jason Lee name their children things like Pilot Inspector, further influencing the decisions of Americans, will untraditional names top the charts of high- or low-educated lists? Whichever way it swings, the baby names could become a much more obvious social dividing class.
If what people think of you isn't important, at least try to remember that without your permission, your child cannot change his name until his eighteenth birthday. This means he must go through eighteen years of life going to school with the name your wrote on his birth certificate. If his classmates do not think the name is common enough, they will probably make fun of it.
After all, as the National Youth Violence Prevention Resource Center points out, about thirty percent of youth in America are involved in bullying, either as the tormentor or the victim. One study showed that the most common reason a child is picked on is that he doesn't quite fit in. This can mean the wrong hair, the wrong clothes, the wrong behavior; but it's also quite difficult to blend into the mass of students when you have a name spelled ESPN. Bullies are unoriginal almost by definition, so a weird name makes it all the easier to create ridicule. The center tells that prolonged bullying can lead the victim to feel tense, anxious, and afraid, which can affect concentration in school, which can lower grades, which can affect the child's entire future!
Most people's adult life is relatively unaffected by their name, but there are exceptions. An article on Parenting Humor, a website dedicated to parents, said that one girl was named Temptress, from a mistake the mother made in identifying Temptest Bledsoe's name. When Temptress grew up, she was often charged with "ungovernable behavior," including bringing men home with her while her mother was at work!
Some say their Freedom of Speech would be violated if they were told it was illegal to give their newborn a certain name. The Constitution is important to Americans, and this importance can sometimes fog their sense of practical reason. In making baby name laws, however, the Freedom of Speech would not be violated, as it would not be illegal to give yourself a unique name. Enforcing baby name laws would also be protecting the child's right to the Pursuit of Happiness. Though the Pursuit of Happiness is not in the Constitution, it is in the Declaration of Independence: "They are endowed by their Creator with certain unaliable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." As I mentioned before, a silly name is easily made fun of, and being made fun of affects one's happiness.
Nation's all over the world are making laws or enforcing restrictions on new baby names, so why can't the United States follow their lead? According to the Herald Tribune, most Scandinavian countries have basic restrictions of names--including disallowing names uncommon in the respective country--and Denmark has only seven thousand legal names to give a baby. America is different from these countries in that it is comprised almost completely of immigrants or descendants of immigrants, so these practices could hinder ethnic names.
So what should the U.S. do in terms of better laws for baby names? One thing we could do is disallow names that are not documented in recent world history. If parents desire a name that has no documentation, we would also have to allow them to submit the name for approval. City officials could be chosen to approve or decline names submitted by expecting parents. The city knows its demographics better than the state or federal levels, so it could identify a name as part of a foreign heritage or just nonsense that the parents created in their sleep. Names that cause negative reactions, such as Adolf Hitler, could be made completely illegal.
If America does not put stricter laws into play, we civilians can still help the future generations. It's our duty as Americans to protect the children of tomorrow. We can do the obvious thing and not name our children unsuitable names. A little positive peer pressure can go a long way as well. Expecting parents will hopefully listen to reason if their friends inform them of bestowing unusual monikers. These consequences are that offensive names will hinder the child's ability to be respected, and that ridiculous names will cause either the parent or the child ridicule.
So please. Your children depend on you. Your neighbor's children depend on you. America's children depend on you. Consider the repercussions of names. Would a Robert or a Susan by any other name be just as normal? The answer is: probably not.
Of course, if you've always grown up wishing you yourself could be referred to as Number 16 Bus Shelter or Orange Jell-O, well, there's nothing stopping you from changing your name when you reach eighteen years of age, other than common sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stacey Morgan on Mar 29, 2009 2:03:55 GMT
I agree, The law woudn't be unconstitutional, infact, I think it would actually be constitutional in that it would be protective of the child's rights and liberties. A name approval board?... Is it a formality or an inconvenience? I can see the courts filled with appeals, counter suits, etc. Are these people who name their children thinks like Cell Phone really fit to parent? - It's one of those deep political questions. --- Back to your dissertation, it's a good read. I never thought of it until now (well not to that degree) but I'll be doing a bit of further reading  |
|
|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Mar 30, 2009 19:08:33 GMT
The name approval board PROBABLY wouldn't be used much. It's not hard to find documentation that a name has been legally given to children, but we do need that option of figuring out what can and can not be used for a name.
I stumbled on the topic completely by accident. I had already started work on a different speech (it was about vegetarianism...so glad I dropped that one), when I stumbled on an article about Adolf Hitler Campbell!
So I've noticed that I just became a "Junior Member" instead of a "New Member." When does the change happen? Is it number of posts or amount of time as a member?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stacey Morgan on Mar 30, 2009 22:56:23 GMT
I'm tipping at 75 posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Apr 4, 2009 18:40:06 GMT
Yup. My life is over.
*sigh*
No, just my interesting life, not literally, stop your dialing to the suicide hotline!
I didn't make final rounds today. That means that I am done with Speech for the year. *sigh*
Well. Any suggestions for next year's topic? Again, I'm in Original Oratory, which is persuasive speeches. Topics I will NOT do: gay marriage/rights (because I'm in the closet and don't wish to leave its dark cozy-ness), abortion (because I still don't know my opinion on it), anything environment related (WAY too over-done), or modesty (see reason before). Topics I have already done and can not do again: women's rights, global warming, assertive behavior, and names. If anyone has any clever ideas, I'd be willing to consider them!
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewlj2002 on Apr 4, 2009 19:55:55 GMT
Animal rights? Socialism vs. capitalism?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamoc on Apr 4, 2009 23:13:28 GMT
Do terminally ill patients have the right to die?
Should 18 year old people have full rights and responsibilities?
Legality of Public Smoking.
Vending machines in school.
Should drug testing be mandatory for all public workers
|
|
|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Apr 7, 2009 23:43:20 GMT
Gamoc, I really like your first suggestion. Do you have any suggested reading?
(I'm still taking suggestions)
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewlj2002 on Apr 8, 2009 14:55:57 GMT
Legality of Public Smoking. To expand on this, what about legalizing drugs, specifically marijuana? |
|
|
|
Post by Stacey Morgan on Apr 8, 2009 20:25:20 GMT
If you do go with a medical text, research the Hipocratic Oath:
"I swear this oath by Apollo Physician,
By Asclepius, by Health,
And by all the gods and godesses,
That in what soever place I enter,
I will help the sick and heal the injured,
And I will do no harm."
|
|
|
|
Post by lala003 on Apr 9, 2009 16:21:47 GMT
Gamoc, I really like your first suggestion. Do you have any suggested reading? (I'm still taking suggestions) i would recomend "whose life is it anyway" by brian clark. i really liked it |
|
|
|
Post by LonelyArtist on Apr 24, 2009 2:40:26 GMT
Sometimes I hate being asexual, I really do. Being homosexual has sort of a uniqueness to it, there's scholorships and everything. I know as a homo-romantic I'm allowed into the benefits of said scholarships, since few can understand the difference between "sexual" and "romantic" orientation. It's just not very glamorous. I don't know if I'll ever have a significant other. It is very hard to find other asexuals, since there's no "asexual pride" stickers or asexual bars, at least that I know of! There's forums and everything, but I'm a minor and I don't feel safe meeting though that medium. The chances of anyone in my school of three hundred students or town of two thousand being asexual, or even knowing what asexual is, is slim. And if I tell someone I'm asexual, what are the chances of my being accepted into a romantic relationship if she's not asexual? I don't MIND the thought of having sex just to please a partner, I'm really ok with it, but most people find it weird, like asexuals are prostitutes or something.
Luckily for me, there are no conflicts religiously being asexual, the Catholic (though I am Lutheran!) church actually commends the practice of celibacy, which being asexual usually entails.
YARGH!! Well, if anyone has any advice, I'll gladly take it, otherwise at least this increases my post count!
|
|
