Trump should ask Congress to pass a German-style naming law?

by philg

My Facebook friends are outraged that Donald Trump purportedly stumbled over the names of a U.S. soldier killed in our war against an Islamic group in Niger (example: BBC). Let’s consider the challenge presented to our 71-year-old president/dictator (depending on one’s Facebook friend set). The soldier’s first name was “La David” and his widow’s name is “Myeshia”.

Even if somehow a person of Donald Trump’s age and experience could have been selected as Prime Minister under a parliamentary system, this couldn’t have happened in Germany. From the Wikipedia page on naming laws:

Names have to be approved by the local registration office, called Standesamt, which generally consults a list of first names and foreign embassies for foreign names. The name has to indicate gender [!], it cannot be a last name or a product, and it cannot negatively affect the child. If the name submitted is denied, it can be appealed; otherwise a new name has to be submitted. A fee is charged for each submission.

I learned about this in 1993 on a trip to New Zealand. The hippies running the tour company gave as one reason for emigrating that they couldn’t name their (male) child the German word for “Ruby.”

[Denmark has a similar law:

Under the Law on Personal Names, first names are picked from a list of approved names (18,000 female names and 15,000 male names as of Jan 1st 2016). One can also apply to Ankestyrelsen for approval of new names, e.g. common first names from other countries. Names must indicate gender [!], cannot have surname character, and must follow Danish orthography (e.g. Cammmilla with three m’s is not allowed).

]

To avoid future embarrassment and Facebook firestorms, what if Donald Trump were to ask Congress to adopt a German-style naming law? On the one hand, this could be considered family law, in which case the American tradition is for it to be different in every state. On the other hand, Congress can say that names are important in interstate commerce and thereby avoid Constitutional challenges.

[Separately, I have learned that one way to further outrage already-outraged Facebook users is to respond to their demands that Trump apologize for this phone call with “If the president of the U.S. is going to be giving apologies, why not ask him to begin by apologizing for starting the Iraq War, fighting in Vietnam, and opposing the Soviet efforts to govern Afghanistan?”]

12 thoughts on “Trump should ask Congress to pass a German-style naming law?”

  1. What we call ourselves or our children is none of the government’s business. If you do not have the right to name yourself whatever you want, you have no freedom of speech, expression and self-determination, period. The moral and ideological angles aside, any such law will be absolutely unconstitutional.

    Europe should not be the society we aspire to, it should be the society we run away from. On taxation, on healthcare, on social entitlements, no censorship, on guns, on the Global Warming fraud, on immigration, on refugees… Europe is the prime example of what every freedom loving, country loving, American should shun and steer the hell away from.

  2. Dwight: While I have some sympathy for people who want to change their own name, I think that children need some level of protection from their parents. Should it be really be legal to give a girl a boy’s name? Or to call a boy “Adolf Hitler”? If not forbidden by law, I think these are still cases for Child Protective Services.

  3. I heard the President “spoke his name from the beginning, without hesitation” which would make this law unnecessary.

    Separately, why wouldn’t outraged people be further outraged by a blatant straw man argument?

  4. Here’s a better idea. When we have presidential elections, candidates should be handed a list of names and asked to pronounce them. Anyone who fails to pronounce 90% of them correctly should be disqualified from the presidency. If Trump can’t pronounce La David and Myeshia, he might have problems with Robert and Nancy.

    Of course, the other obvious problem is only new births would be affected. By the time babies born this year are serving in the armed forces, Trump will be dead and buried.

    You should change your blog’s slogan to something like “trying to ridicule my Facebook friends daily, making an interesting point that way very rarely”.

  5. Dwight: I didn’t mean to suggest that this law would be better (or worse) for the American people. Only that it would be expedient for current and future rulers. Aren’t a lot of laws passed for the convenience of rulers rather than for the welfare of common people?

  7. philg: Taking a moment to make sure they know how to pronounce all of the names involved before placing a condolence call is part of the President’s job. Why exactly should we upend US law and society just because the current occupant of the office isn’t up to this fairly trivial job requirement?

  8. I haven’t followed the La David thing closely, but this discussion reminds me of the Key & Peele Substitute Teacher sketch:

  10. Afaik, Japan has a list of names that are approved and I don’t think one is allowed to select a name outside of that list (so that parents don’t name their child ‘devil’ or something stupid like that.)

  11. A mature, sensible attitude is all that’s needed to avoid uncomfortable situations with unusual names:

  12. The solution is simple. You should be able to name yourself or your children whatever you want. Anyone who cannot pronounce the name or wants to get offended, well, should pronounce it incorrectly and be offended. The very definition of a free society that that individuals have the right to offend and be offended (or not). This PC bullshit that we have a moral and legal obligation to not offend anyone and can be held liable for being offensive is the very definition of Tyranny. Remember, kind and unobjectionable speech does not need protection or constitutional guarantees. It is offensive speech and opinions that need protection. Naming is no different.

Comments are closed.