NationStates Jolt Archive

I had an interesting discussion with two of my friends today that left me feeling a little sour.

One of my friends is from a foreign country (me being an American), and she told me that where she lives, certain names given to newborns will not be accepted as valid due to their irregular nature. I voiced my concern for the violation of the rights of the parents (in my opinion) in naming their children, but both she and my other friend agreed that it was justified in order to protect the child from ridicule. :rolleyes:

Then we got into a discussion about book banning. My friends seemed to think it was alright to ban books such as Mein Kampf due to their possible violence-inducing nature. I disagreed once again, citing that if a government is allowed to ban certain ideas, there's not telling how far they will take that power. They said I was taking things too far, but I believe that it's justified to imagine a slippery slope of government censorship before we give up our right to express a certain idea.

Anyway, both discussions left me a little pissed off. What are your thoughts?

I'm completely against censorship except in the case of sensitive military secrets or porn involving children or non consentual acts. Everything else should be available for those who want to view/hear/read it. Also I think parents should be able to name their kid whatever they want. Even a meaningless string of numbers and punctuation marks should be ok.

I had an interesting discussion with two of my friends today that left me feeling a little sour.

One of my friends is from a foreign country (me being an American), and she told me that where she lives, certain names given to newborns will not be accepted as valid due to their irregular nature. I voiced my concern for the violation of the rights of the parents (in my opinion) in naming their children, but both she and my other friend agreed that it was justified in order to protect the child from ridicule. :rolleyes:

Then we got into a discussion about book banning. My friends seemed to think it was alright to ban books such as Mein Kampf due to their possible violence-inducing nature. I disagreed once again, citing that if a government is allowed to ban certain ideas, there's not telling how far they will take that power. They said I was taking things too far, but I believe that it's justified to imagine a slippery slope of government censorship before we give up our right to express a certain idea.

Anyway, both discussions left me a little pissed off. What are your thoughts?

1) What nation are they from? That makes a difference.

2) did this discussion take place in the US?

3) I think your friends need to grow a spine.

1) What nation are they from? That makes a difference.

2) did this discussion take place in the US?

3) I think your friends need to grow a spine.
1) She is from Germany, and this apparently goes on there.
2) Yes.

1) She is from Germany, and this apparently goes on there.

Ok, that explains My Struggle then. I do not know about the name thing though. That's a new one on me.

2) Yes.

Did ya tell her that we can say pretty much we want provided that we are not inciting a riot and that we can name our kids however we want and what was her reaction to it?

Ok, that explains My Struggle then. I do not know about the name thing though. That's a new one on me.



Did ya tell her that we can say pretty much we want provided that we are not inciting a riot and that we can name our kids however we want and what was her reaction to it?
She and my other friend apparently agreed that freedom of speech has been to be limited if people disagree with it. Pretty lame, especially considering my other friend is supposedly an extreme leftist...

Freedom of speech forever!! :)

... Also I think parents should be able to name their kid whatever they want. Even a meaningless string of numbers and punctuation marks should be ok.
LOL sweet! :D

One of my friends is from a foreign country (me being an American), and she told me that where she lives, certain names given to newborns will not be accepted as valid due to their irregular nature. I voiced my concern for the violation of the rights of the parents (in my opinion) in naming their children, but both she and my other friend agreed that it was justified in order to protect the child from ridicule. :rolleyes:
What about the rights of the child to not look like a plonker?

Banning it is a bit too far, though, I confess, although I might send Social Services round to look into the suitability of any parent who exercised such a 'right'.

She and my other friend apparently agreed that freedom of speech has been to be limited if people disagree with it. Pretty lame, especially considering my other friend is supposedly an extreme leftist...

So they do not like any dissent whatsoever?

Freedom of speech forever!! :)


LOL sweet! :D
Yeah, and it would be pronounced "Bob".


546/?210#658435"5:234.,>5478 = Bob

1) Yes, there should be some restrictions placed on which name you can give your child or at least a provision allowing the child to change his/her name. I don't want parents going around calling their child Dickwad without fear of punishment. There should, of course, be limits placed on the power of the state to change the name of the child if that is the course of action taken. Since you can't ban the cause of stupidity, you might as well ban its consequences.

2) Well, some books should be banned, but not those that express an ideology. However, if the book's message is to kill all Jews, or says how to make a home-made bomb, then it should be banned. Comments leading to the commission of a crime should themselves be considered criminal.

I think naming your kid Dickwad constitutes child abuse. Or Gaylord.

I have no trouble with a reasonable limitation on names. I don't see this as a central "freedom of speech"-issue, but rather as a question of protecting the child.

I do agree with you regarding Mein Kampf, however, even if I understand that Germany could be a special case conserning that particular book.

If your last name was Soft, would you be legally able to name your kid "Micro" or not in the USA? I somehow feel that a certain Mr Gates would object.

2) Well, some books should be banned, but not those that express an ideology. However, if the book's message is to kill all Jews, or says how to make a home-made bomb, then it should be banned. Comments leading to the commission of a crime should themselves be considered criminal.
No, they really shouldn't be banned. I grew up reading stuff like the Anarchist's Cookbook and Poor Man's James Bond. Both books deal with making explosives and improvised weapons and I never blew anyone up. Neither book is harmfull in and of itself. We shouldn't criminalize information, only harmfull behavior.

There's a man in America who legally changed his name. He is now listed in the phonebook as Heywood Youblowme. That man is an inspiration to us all.

Isn't it spelt Heywood Jablome?

I seem to recall the Japanese having laws about that as well, although i could be wrong. Some guy wanted to call his kid 'Devil baby' or something and the authorities put their foot down.

Neither book is harmfull in and of itself. We shouldn't criminalize information, only harmfull behavior.

Let's say that there was a book which said how to build an explosive that would kill the maximum amount of people. Say it called for detonating a particular type of bomb in a busy subway at 5:00. Sure enough, a bomb is detonated in the subway and kills tens of people. Is the author guilty? In my opinion: hell yeah, he should rot in jail. Of course, to prevent this, the book should not have been published in the first place.

My dad's side of the family is from Argentina and there are laws there dictating what constitutes an acceptable, registerable name. Only recently has the list in that particular country been expanded to accept indian names.

It's funny to think that the name my dad passed down to me had to be rubberstamped by some foreign bureaucrat.

yes, but what about a book that tells you how to construct the shell and lethal projectiles for a bomb(inert without explosives, legal), and then gives you the IDSN of a chemistry book that shows how to refine the chemicals you need to make the explosives?

Should some innocent chemistry professor/book author go to jail, or should the referencing author? He didnt tell you how to make explosives after all...

Guilt lies with the person effecting the steps, not the one teaching them.


In regards to odd names, there is a Canadian member of Parliment with the given name of "Inky". whats his last name? "Mark".

Point One of the German Constitution:
"The dignity of the Human being shall be inviolable."

I think calling your child "Worthless piece of shit" is somewhat problematic as far as dignity is concerned. That being said, I had never even heard of the law until today, telling me that it is rarely if ever actually used.

A much more serious case of censorship in Germany is with regards to computer games. Violence is not considered good for kids...

Let's say that there was a book which said how to build an explosive that would kill the maximum amount of people. Say it called for detonating a particular type of bomb in a busy subway at 5:00. Sure enough, a bomb is detonated in the subway and kills tens of people. Is the author guilty? In my opinion: hell yeah, he should rot in jail. Of course, to prevent this, the book should not have been published in the first place.
Depends. I'm not in favor of books specifically telling people to commit violent crime. However if the book didn't say to bomb the subway, but just described how to build the bomb and how to make sure it killed the maximum number of people and you ban it you set a dangerous precedent. Now if a guy goes out and gets marksmanship training and ends up shooting some people someone might get the bright idea to arrest the guy who runs the local shooting range. Or perhaps a guy takes chemistry in university and uses that knowledge to blow up someone. Now it can be argued that his chemistry professor taught him dangerous information and is responsible for the criminal's actions. See where I'm going with this?

I've always wanted to ask a German:
How does the federal government's ban on the swastika effect people who practise the religions of South Asia? Is it acceptable to display the swastika as long as it's oriented in the right direction and displayed in proper context?

A much more serious case of censorship in Germany is with regards to computer games. Violence is not considered good for kids...
Well, the US’s violent crime rates are dropping and have been dropping as video games have become more and more violent.
I mean come on, we’re the fucking US. If it doesn’t make us shoot something how could it affect anybody?

Isn't it spelt Heywood Jablome?
Possibly.

Point One of the German Constitution:
"The dignity of the Human being shall be inviolable."
And yet they let you people ware lederhosen?

I've always wanted to ask a German:
How does the federal government's ban on the swastika effect people who practise the religions of South Asia? Is it acceptable to display the swastika as long as it's oriented in the right direction and displayed in proper context?
Well, firstly, it's not a general ban. It's part of a larger framework trying to prevent agitation by right-wing groups.

You can show it in all sorts of contexts, just not in one that is seen to be glorification. Otherwise documentaries and museums and all that would be in trouble.

And yes, religious freedom goes above the problems some people have when they see Swastikas.

And yet they let you people ware lederhosen?
Bavarians are not Germans. They're hillbilly freaks of questionable allegiance. ;)

I don't think any book should be banned just because of the ideas it expresses. As some famous politician or someone once said, "an idea cannot be blamed for those who believe in it." I can understand why Germany would have issues with Mein Kampf, but the only people who are going to turn into Nazis because of it are those who already are. I've read it, and it didn't make me suddenly believe in Hitler and his point of view. If anything it made me dislike him even more, if that's possible, because it actually shows you his thought process.

As for the names, i think that's silly. Yes, some people give their children weird names, but i think most democratic countries give kids the options of legally changing their names when they reach the age of majority. Not to mention that many parents who give their kids odd first names give them normal middle names so they can use their middle name when they grow up, if they want. Kids will always find something to make fun of other kids for, if it's not their name, it will be their clothes, their parents, etc.

I'm completely against censorship except in the case of sensitive military secrets or porn involving children or non consentual acts. Everything else should be available for those who want to view/hear/read it. Also I think parents should be able to name their kid whatever they want. Even a meaningless string of numbers and punctuation marks should be ok.
I'm Mr. Mopar, and I absolutely agree with DDC's comment. Vote Mopar!

This post was paid for by Mothers Against Government Censorship.

See where I'm going with this?

Down a slippery slope? There is a difference between learning chemistry in college and learning how to make a deadly bomb. Namely, a deadly bomb cannot be used for anything except, you guessed it, killing people. Chemistry, on the other, can come in handy for other things, like science. If you make a book while knowing full well that the information it contains will aid somebody in committing a violent crime, then you are complicit in the crime or at least reckless endangerment. Marksmanship training is a bit more iffy, but still doesn't quite do it. The training can also be used for deer hunting or effective self-defense, not just crime. Do you think a book telling somebody exactly how to make a bomb that could hypothetically kill thousands of people should be banned? Why should we disperse dangerous information, allowing it to fall in the hands of deadly criminals? I'm all for the first amendment as long as it doesn't get somebody killed, and this isn't like yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre -- it is setting fire to a crowded theatre.

Sunshine, Aswipea, Liberty, Freedom, Rainbow, Lemonjello, Orangejello Nosmo and Laquinta's parents should have been in German!!!! The name thing is cool by me let your kid have a normal name until they are an adult then if they what to be a friggin symbol let them.

Book censoship however is simply wrong and shouldn't be tolerated.

Ideas are more dangerous than bombs!!! Would you ban them? Ban Marx, Engles, Hitler, Jefferson, Sun Tzu, The Bible??? Who's Ideas surely some ideas can only do harm and must be banned.





Down a slippery slope? There is a difference between learning chemistry in college and learning how to make a deadly bomb. Namely, a deadly bomb cannot be used for anything except, you guessed it, killing people. Chemistry, on the other, can come in handy for other things, like science. If you make a book while knowing full well that the information it contains will aid somebody in committing a violent crime, then you are complicit in the crime or at least reckless endangerment. Marksmanship training is a bit more iffy, but still doesn't quite do it. The training can also be used for deer hunting or effective self-defense, not just crime. Do you think a book telling somebody exactly how to make a bomb that could hypothetically kill thousands of people should be banned? Why should we disperse dangerous information, allowing it to fall in the hands of deadly criminals? I'm all for the first amendment as long as it doesn't get somebody killed, and this isn't like yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre -- it is setting fire to a crowded theatre.