I'm a child of the 1970's. My town is where the Haight and Ashbury crowd moved to flee those flower-power usurpers. So I know a bit about "less traditional" names. My best friend was named Amandus. I went to grade-school with a girl named Plum Blossom. There was a girl in my town named Groovy (don't ask about her middle name). But we wild-eyed hippies aren't to be trusted, so don't take my word for it.
If Mariah Carey and Nick Cannon can name their son "Moroccan", and Ichiro Suzuki can legally drop his last name to become "Ichiro", and Nicolas Cage can name his son "Kal-El", and the Pope can name himself "Francis", then why can't this Tennessee mother name her son "Messiah"?
But Judge Ballew wins the we're-all-a-little-bit-less-intelligent-because-of-you award when she says, "At this point, he has had no choice in what his name is." I think that I speak for most parents when I agree on this point: babies tend not to name themselves.
What made this story Jesus-Blog worthy was the answer that Ballew gave when asked about the countless Latinos who are named "Jesús." She answered, "That's not relevant to this case." Not relevant? What precedent could be more relevant? Ballew is the person who played the Jesus-card and the name Jesús is irrelevant?
Come on Tennessee, you're making us Northern Californians look reasonable by comparison.
-anthony
No comments:
Post a Comment