CreateDebate


Debate Info

50
60
YES NO
Debate Score:110
Arguments:97
Total Votes:119
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 YES (39)
 
 NO (52)

Debate Creator

PrayerFails(11164) pic



Should the government be regulating baby names?

JUST WHEN I THOUGHT THE GOVERNMENT COULDN'T GET ANY MORE RIDICOLUS, THEY INCLUDE THE REGULATION OF BABY NAMES.

NOT THE US, Baby NAMES

YES

Side Score: 50
VS.

NO

Side Score: 60

Yes. I don't want to have to deal with a kid named "Kar-a" pronounced, "Kardasha." ;)

Side: YES
2 points

I met someone once who called her daughter Chardonnay like the wine (her own words), I was tempted to ask her if the wine was the reason she had the kid

Side: YES
1 point

I once ran into someone named Brandy. I approve of the choice of drink ;)

Side: YES
2 points

Only if the name is particularly sadistic to the child. Otherwise, whatever name suits.

Side: YES

I remember the children named Adolf Hitler. that was quite overkill.

Side: YES
2 points

Turned out there was abuse involved in that family as well and the childs names gave the social services the excuse they needed to investigate the family and get the kids into care

Side: YES
2 points

If someone wants to name their kid Adolf Hitler they can, its their choice and it doesn't matter who it offends. People should be allowed to name their child what they want regardless of if you deem their name to be morally acceptable or not.

Side: NO
Banana_Slug(845) Disputed
1 point

This sort of answer I would expect from one those retards with swastika as an avatar.

Side: YES
Facadeon(510) Disputed
0 points

But we have to understand just what is more important here; the traumatizing bullying the child will face from being 'different', and the distress of the individuals offended over the name, (old survivors of the holocaust being reminded of their distress at the mention of Adolf Hitler.)

People have the RIGHT to not feel traumatized, bullied and offended, which I believe, is MORE valuable.

Side: YES
5 points

Of course not... and I just saw where some girl in Iceland was named "light breeze" (in their language) which was not an approved name so she is now referred to as 'girl'.

Side: NO

We shouldn't be over-regulating all apsects of life.

Side: NO

Seriously, parents should have the freedom to name their child with whatever they please. Any loving parent will never name their child some ridiculous name. Even some odd names like Metallica, Superman, Veranda, Ikea and Elvis are perfectly fine.

Side: NO
MrPrime(268) Disputed
2 points

I agree with your statement and "hope" the government never needs too. Playing devils advocate, what if a unloving parent names their child "Stupid" and the child suffers terribly because of the name?

Side: YES
1 point

Well, approved names already exist in Sweden among others.

First, unloving parents are far inbetween even low income families.

Second, naming a child Stupid would be extremely embarrassing among family and friends, not to mention family and friends could get it changed in the interest of the child.

Side: NO

One day a man walked into court. The judge pulled up his case and said. "Mr Balls, it says here that you want to change your last name. "Balls" is not an unusual name, why do you want to change it?"

.Man replied "it is embarrassing."

.Judge shrugs and says, "seems fine to me, but it's your name. For the record, please provide the court with your first name."

.Man replies "Harry."

.

Some parents. . . . . can be cruel. But government shouldn't have the power to regulated baby names.

Side: NO
1 point

Nope. If parent wants to give there child an inappropriate name and make life harder that's there choice. And the child would most likely changing there own name.

Side: NO
1 point

This is true David Bowie's son was named Zowie but changed it to Duncan, keeping Zowie as a middle name

Side: NO
1 point

Parents can name their child whatever they want to, when the child turns 18, they can change it. If you want freedom, you must be tolerant of what other people do with their freedom.

Side: NO
MrPrime(268) Disputed
2 points

Don't take this the wrong way, but what if your parents named you "Turd". How "free" would you feel being bullied in middle school every single day?

Side: YES
1 point

I think that would be a no, because there would be repetition of names. Or when there are so many names like that, then there would be names which are so weird to hear, and many people would invent weird names.

Side: NO

No since that would defeat the right of its citizens to live freely and choose how to be called.

Side: NO

It's a matter of taste. Some people like their eccentric names and others want to stick with names like "Bob" and "Joe... (Cavalry)." So the government shouldn't be regulating baby names any more than they should be regulating the decor in your living room to ensure it remains tasteful. A. Because the government has shown repeatedly it doesn't know what good taste is and B. because taste is subjective, anyways. Some children suffer when their parents name them "Wednesday," but others come to hate the average, normal names they were given like "Chris" and change it to something more interesting as soon as they can. My point is regulating names does nothing to ensure that kids won't be ridiculed for or dislike their name; it can happen even when there are only normal names to choose from. So let the parents choose and when the kid becomes an adult they can decide for themselves if they want to keep the name or not.

Side: NO

Naming a child as parents best see fit is fundamentally rooted in freedom many names are heirlooms handed down generations.

Side: NO

It would be foolish for the Government to step in and regulate names for babies.

Side: NO