The Shotgun Blog
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Quebec's civil registrar intervenes in naming babies
Apparently Quebec's civil registrar has the ability to reject names that parents want to give their children, as one Quebec couple found out while trying to give their child the middle name "Avalanche."
But Marie Godbout, a spokeswoman for the registrar, says the translated letter should have said the government had a problem with Logan's middle name, Avalanche.
She says the registrar only rejects uncommon names it feels will cause children to be ridiculed and that parents can appeal the decision.
William Azeff says he and his wife chose the name because it reflects their commitment to nature.
He said the registrar originally took issue with the name of his other son, Brant Glacier, before giving approval.
Sure, they're a couple of hippie parents naming their kids after cold-weather phenomena, but who cares? If this kind of legislation spread we might not have Moxie CrimeFighter Jillette.
EDITOR'S UPDATE: Here's a short video clip of the comedian Louis C K discussing the above "problem." There is some foul language at the end of the video, so be careful where you watch it:
Posted by Janet Neilson on May 5, 2009 | Permalink
Those Frenchies didn't listen to enough Johnny Cash! Remember, "A Boy named Sue" - Goofy names make em tough.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-05-05 10:32:12 AM
Quebec has the most socialist collectivist government in Canada which never ceases to find ways of meddling and interfering in the lives of its citizens. How many were aware that Quebec does not allow a married woman to take her husband's name? She does not even have a choice, for the decision was made by the government. The same goes for naming your children, which actually is not new.
This is the government that has even outlawed any free range poultry: chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese, guinea fowl et cetera, and they have special "troopers" sneaking around rural areas to ensure that there is not a single bird not confined. I realise that this probably means nothing to urban folk, but it is still another case of loss of freedom and independence for the people.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-05-05 11:15:55 AM
Those examples are all news to me but I'm not surprised.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-05-05 3:47:16 PM
Funny. I remember someone arguing that giving the fools more freedom would enhance ours somehow ...
Posted by: Charles | 2009-05-05 7:15:19 PM
Posted by: Charles | 2009-05-05 7:15:41 PM
I think there was a case where some couple wanted to name their kid "spatule". Might have been a urban legend however ...
Posted by: Charles | 2009-05-05 7:17:34 PM
Perhaps it's personal with them when it comes to Avalanche. I wonder if Nordique would pass the test.
Posted by: Realist | 2009-05-05 9:00:52 PM
Yes..yes... personal freedom is SSSOOO important...
hey idiots... they wanted to name their child 'avalanche'...
Sorry, but some things should be censored.
Posted by: Phil | 2009-05-05 9:25:31 PM
Hey Phil, does your mom let you stay up this late?
Posted by: Realist | 2009-05-05 10:25:29 PM
Phil, beware of the government that enforces the ideas you agree with. Because the more powerful you help them become, the more likely they will one day turn against what you consider freedom.
To protect what you consider freedom, you must defend freedom for all.
Posted by: TM | 2009-05-05 10:40:30 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.