My Dad didn't have one, my Mom doesn't have one, and I don't have one. Why does that shock people?
Why do we even need one? When did they start being added to a person's name?

LOL That happens to me too.
I have no middle name and sometimes people seem to think that is weird. I think middle names are a religious thing..

Found this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_name:

Western middle names:
Middle names are chosen by parents at the same time as the first name. Popular middle names are identical to those of first names, such as John, James, David, etc., with an emphasis on biblical figures (again, like first names).

Catholic middle names:
During the confirmation process of every Catholic's life, the name of a saint must be chosen for the Catholic to research, and eventually make part of his/her name. The saint's name is put after his/her middle name, if indeed a middle name was given.

Neither of my parents had a middle name. I have no middle name. My wife has no middle name and none of my kids has a middle name. All of my grandchldren have middle names though.

I think parents give kids middle names so the kids will know when they are really pissed at them.

Charley, give the toy back to your brother.

Charles, give the toy back to your brother.

Charles William, give the toy back to your brother this instant.

I have a middle name , nietzsche does and so do my kids. I have never once called them by it though.
It really is useless.

They're handy if your a serial killer...they always have 3 names. :)

I guess if you have a very common first and last name, it helps to distinguish you from everyone else. Or if you're parents gave you a really nerdy first name, you can always go by your middle name.

I know no-one with a middle name.

a bit of trivia concerning middle names:
the "S" in harry s truman was harrys middle name.

Back in my day, and to a lesser extent still today, many people named their children after themselves. Kenneth Schroeder has a son named Kenneth Schroeder, or Susan Marciano has a daughter named Susan Marciano, and it can get pretty confusing. Middle names help them sort it out. My father and I had the same first and last names.

Today with the explosive spread of communication via the internet, we all encounter people with the same name. If you're in business or the arts or academia and you want people to be able to find you with a search engine, you'd better use your middle name. There are three other Fraggle Rockers out there, and each one of them has just enough in common with me that it would make a prospective customer, fan, or correspondent wonder whether they'd found me. Two of the three are significantly more prominent than I am so it takes people a while to track me down. It's too late to add my middle name now because no one knows it. Back in high school people knew me as Fractionator Pythagoras Rocker because my father had already coopted the nickname Fraggle, but I'm not about to try to reestablish myself with my full name.

Of course some communities have found more creative ways around this problem by breaking out of the paradigm of traditional names and giving their kids names like Condoleezza. But if you're not going to do that, I advise everyone who is going to have children to give them a middle name so they don't get lost on the internet!

Japanese traditionally only have a surname and a given name, in that order. But between them they typically have seven or eight syllables so there's not a lot of overlap among Japanese names. Japanese-Americans, at least back in my day, wanted very much for their children to grow up and assimilate, so they gave them English names. But they also wanted to be able to write about their kids in their letters back to the old country and there were two big problems. One is that English has about eleventy times as many phonemes as Japanese, and the other is that in Japanese every consonant must be followed by a vowel (except N). It's impossible to transcribe names like Martha and Stanley in kana, the phonetic syllable-alphabet. So they gave their children Western middle names carefully chosen for their conformance to Japanese phonetics, and many nisei had names like George Ben Matsuhara and Alice Naomi Hasegawa.

Chinese only has 1,600 distinct syllables (in Mandarin) so if people only had two one-syllable names it would be chaos. (Although that has become more common with the one-child rule.) Every family has a log book that was passed down from their great-grandparents, stipulating the "generation name" for each generation of offspring. Surname comes first, then generation name, then finally you get to choose the third name for your kids. My Chinese girlfriend was born just as Japan was overrunning China, and her generation name happened to be a word that means "to remember fondly." So she and each of her siblings got a third name that was the name of one of the provinces that had been captured by the Japanese. Her name meant "I miss Liao(ning) province."

In the American South, it's common for adults to form nicknames for children based on both their first and middle names, something that is absolutely not practiced elsewhere. That's why Southerners so often have names like Billy Bob and Suzie Jo, from William Robert McCoy and Susanne Josephine Thibodeaux.

I know no-one with a middle name.

Seriously??? do you think it;s more common in certain places??? For example the majority of people i know i have a middle name, maybe its a british thing.
I have a middle name and a confirmation name (louise and faith:o)

Well, it must be more common in certain places, because in Latvia usually only the first name is used, but I know that some catholic people have the second one, know none of them personally though.

What we have more common here is double surnames (or family names).

Isn't there also something like a baptize name ?

The Spanish are all into second names.
One my friend has a teacher from Spain and her name is Mary Jesus. :D

The Spanish are all into second names.
One my friend has a teacher from Spain and her name is Mary Jesus. :D

lol his parents must be quite the practical jokers :D

Well, it must be more common in certain places, because in Latvia usually only the first name is used, but I know that some catholic people have the second one, know none of them personally though.

I'd had the impression that middle names were more-or-less limited to English-speaking countries, with the exception of Catholic religious names used in certain places. The Spanish practice isn't so much a middle name as a pedigree, sort of like the Arab version.

...Charles William, give the toy back to your brother this instant.

Both my kids have middle names. My son was named after my family (first name) and my son's father (middle name). My daughter was named after my mother (middle name). For me it was a show of respect and gratitude....and family. But if you don't name them after someone, why bother?

And yeah, when I'm mad and yelling at them, they get their FULL name said.

I was born in Cyprus at a time when it was still a British colony. In their endeavours to make us lose our national identity, The Brits avoided using our original surnames on official documents and hence my birth certificate bears my first name and my father's first name, but no surname. Eventually I 'borrowed' a surname, which happened to be my grandfather's first name and so I had a middle name. I have since discovered my family's true surname, but it is so lost in antiquity that there are only about 5 entries of that name in the whole of the country's telephone directories.

did you change your name to include your families original surname?

The Spanish are all into second names.
One my friend has a teacher from Spain and her name is Mary Jesus. :D
the spanish pronunciation of jesus is "a zeus"

Well, in latvian it's "yee zus"

I'd had the impression that middle names were more-or-less limited to English-speaking countries, with the exception of Catholic religious names used in certain places. The Spanish practice isn't so much a middle name as a pedigree, sort of like the Arab version.Johann Sebastian Bach. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.

In Russian it's a patronymic. Nikita Sergeyovich Khrushchev: Nikita, son of Sergei.

The Chinese make up one-fifth of the world's population and they have middle names. So do the Koreans and Vietnamese.

I think the reason it's so common in English (and maybe also German) is that for a long time anglophones deliberately reduced themselves to a pitifully small set of traditional names to choose from, so within a family there were likely to be several people with identical names. Germany has laws about what you can name your children. Somebody tried to name her son Schroeder after the character in "Peanuts" and the government wouldn't let her do it because that's a last name. We do it all the time in America: Jackson Brown, Taylor Hicks, Jefferson Davis, Washington Irving.

Oh, don't forget Attila THE Hun. :)
the Spanish pronunciation of Jesus is "a zeus"No. J is a fricative like German CH or Russian KH, and S is (almost) always voiceless. There's an accent ague over the U so it's pronounced more-or-less khay-SOOSS. In America we usually soften that first letter to an English H so we make it hay-SOOSS. (Except in California where most of us speak some Spanish.) Jesús is a rather common given name in Spanish-speaking countries, the way Mohammed is among Muslim people.
Well, in Latvian it's "yee zus""Iesus" is a romanization of Greek Iesous, which itself is a Hellenization of Hebrew Yehoshua, which means "Yhwh (God) rescues." In the Roman era the Jews were speaking Aramaic and only using Hebrew in the liturgy, so in speech Yehoshua had been streamlined to Yeshua, which influenced the Greek form.

did you change your name to include your families original surname?

No, because it would be very labourious but I might do at some point.

Well, in latvian it's "yee zus"
in texas it's ye haw! :D

I have a middle name - Louise, quite bland name considering my first is Fallon. All my family have middles names too.

I have a middle name - Louise, quite bland name considering my first is Fallon. All my family have middles names too.

Sorry this is abit weird, Were you born in the 80's??? If so have you noticed that a large proportion of girls born then, have the middle name louise???

My guess is that the name louise must have really been in vogue in the 1980's, (but why?????)

....My guess is that the name louise must have really been in vogue in the 1980's, (but why?????)

test tube baby Louise Brown? And it must be an English thing because here (US) it was Jessica.

Sorry this is abit weird, Were you born in the 80's??? If so have you noticed that a large proportion of girls born then, have the middle name louise???

My guess is that the name louise must have really been in vogue in the 1980's, (but why?????)


:eek: I was born in the 80's. Surely my parents could have come up with something with a little more jazz?!

Just be happy they didn't name you something like ( Mike Hunt ) a guy I went to school with.... I never can understand how parents could be so STUPID!
Do they not repeat it outloud???????

Just be happy they didn't name you something like ( Mike Hunt ) a guy I went to school with.... I never can understand how parents could be so STUPID!
Do they not repeat it outloud???????

why didn't the idiot go by Michael?

Just be happy they didn't name you something like ( Mike Hunt ) a guy I went to school with.... I never can understand why parents could be so STUPID!

I had to say that aloud before I got it - how rude :p

I once spoke to a lcustomer at my work called Tina Muff, I couldnt stop laughing, honestly nearly wet myself - dumb ass name, but kinda rocks at the same time!

Just be happy they didn't name you something like ( Mike Hunt ) a guy I went to school with.... I never can understand how parents could be so STUPID!
Do they not repeat it outloud???????
LOL. I worked with a guy with that name. Except he DID go by Michael.
I can never hear that name without thinking about the movie 'Porky's'.

I think that name is just as bad as something like Anita Dick. LOL

Tina Muff?? I don't get it. Why is it funny?/

why didn't the idiot go by Michael?

You know what, I think once he was known as that it was too late!!

Look how grown adults here get a kick out of using the " C " word can you imagine in high school.

Tina Muff?? I don't get it. Why is it funny?/

Muff is slang for vagina in Britain

LOL. I worked with a guy with that name. Except he DID go by Michael.
I can never hear that name without thinking about the movie 'Porky's'.

I think that name is just as bad as something like Anita Dick. LOL

hmmmmm was he a really big guy? and did he have a sister Veronica? lol

Muff is slang for vagina in Britain

oh :o

I' got 3 names it's not that od in my family

3 middle names or a first, middle and last?

1 first, 2 middle and 1 last my intitials are AVCDC

Sorry this is a bit weird. Were you born in the 80's? If so have you noticed that a large proportion of girls born then have the middle name Louise? My guess is that the name Louise must have really been in vogue in the 1980's, but why?The movie "Thelma and Louise." It was all about the struggle for female empowerment. At the end when the cops were closing in on them they just drove their car off a cliff rather than be arrested and prosecuted for shooting a good-ole-boy caught in the act of rape.
I was born in the 80's. Surely my parents could have come up with something with a little more jazz?!Be glad you weren't born around 1960 or your name would be Tammy or Debbie after the character in the movie or the star who portrayed her.

Notice how no one has named a boy Adolph in the past sixty years? The TV star A. Martinez goes by A., and all his friends call him A. It turns out his name is Adolph. His parents were from Mexico and the name didn't have quite such bad karma in a non-combatant country.

I'm always surprised that with all the unconventional names that were given to children in the late 1960s, I've never met a girl named after Barbarella.
Muff is slang for vagina in BritainIn the U.S. it's specifically the "muff" of pubic hair. In the 1950s and 60s, the activity the sailors from San Diego engaged in on shore leave, from their ringside tables in the Tijuana strip clubs, was called "muff diving." It engendered a lot of souvenir T-shirts that only people who had seen it could understand. I suppose with this bizarre new fad of Xtreme Shaving, the word will go out of vogue.

The movie "Thelma and Louise." It was all about the struggle for female empowerment. At the end when the cops were closing in on them they just drove their car off a cliff rather than be arrested and prosecuted for shooting a good-ole-boy caught in the act of rape.Be glad you weren't born around 1960 or your name would be Tammy or Debbie after the character in the movie or the star who portrayed her.



Didn't thelma and louise come out in the early 90's ????

Didn't thelma and louise come out in the early 90's ????Yeah, you're right. Ya got me then. But I'm right about Debbie Reynolds and Tammy.

Notice how no one has named a boy Adolph in the past sixty years?

The first of my dad's two middle names is Adolph. He was born before WWII. His first name is Gustaf. My paternal grandparents immigrated from Sweden and King Gustaf Adolph the (some Roman Numeral) was on a state visit to the US at the time. Dad uses the initial A though.

Two middle names was common in swedish names, at least back then. Mom was also of swedish descent and she had two. I think it had to do with the custom of patronymic surnames being retained into the early 1900's.

my older son has my middle name and his girlfriend has the same
and their new born baby now has our middle name hehehe kinda cute shes so adorable
she cuddles up to me and stops crying strait away and her mum says its not fair cause shes the mum and everyone else can stop her crying but her
but first baby and she will work it out

Kinda cute, she's so adorable. She cuddles up to me and stops crying straight away and her mum says its not fair cause she's the mum and everyone else can stop her crying. But her first baby and she will work it out.Babies, with their undeveloped cognitive abilities, have very strong reactions to external sensations. It could be a pheromone or "unconscious odor." The olfactory lobe is the oldest part of the vertebrate forebrain, from which all the rest of it originally developed. In mammals it is still capable of detecting molecules in the air and sending a powerful signal to our instincts, triggering an emotional reaction of which we're not even consciously aware. This happens to us as adults far more often than we realize. It can be responsible for phenomena we have folk-names for such as "cold chills," "sixth sense" and maybe even "woman's intuition."

As a blood relative you may well have compounds in your body chemistry that your granddaughter is programmed to recognize, and the familiarity makes her feel secure.

But it could also be some other subtle stimulus that one of her other senses detects. Your daughter-in-law might want to study the precise way you pick her up and move with her that she senses kinesthetically in her semicircular canals, and the way you hold her and move your body against hers that she senses tactilely in her nerve endings. This could also be something she's programmed to recognize as "family" ways of touching.

Or... it might be that you are just really good at making babies feel loved and secure--in the only ways they're capable of sensing at this age--and as an "elder" in the family you have something valuable to teach the young-uns about parenting. :)

I don't have a middle name, but when I'm asked for one on something like a job application, I usually write down Farooq, because that should have naturally been by middle name given my first name.

... Farooq, because that should have naturally been by middle name given my first name.

why?

King?

why?

Well, my first name is Omar (named after the second Caliph of Islam who was given the title "Al-Farooq"). Where I live, many people add Farooq to the name Omar, which unfortunately never happened to me. Basically, I just added it myself. It's a middle name, so nobody really cares too much anyway.

Well, my first name is Omar (named after the second Caliph of Islam who was given the title "Al-Farooq"). Where I live, many people add Farooq to the name Omar, which unfortunately never happened to me. Basically, I just added it myself. It's a middle name, so nobody really cares too much anyway.Is that THE notorious Caliph Omar of Baghdad? The guy who, in Western sources, is generally held responsible for commanding the armies that obliterated Egyptian civilization and extinguished its Cushitic language? Including, in many accounts, the final torching of the library at Alexandria? Understandably, not a popular fellow among linguists. :(

Perhaps you have a more upbeat biography for him. :)

Is that THE notorious Caliph Omar of Baghdad? The guy who, in Western sources, is generally held responsible for commanding the armies that obliterated Egyptian civilization and extinguished its Cushitic language? Including, in many accounts, the final torching of the library at Alexandria? Understandably, not a popular fellow among linguists. :(

Obliterated Egyptian civilization? More like helped it. Egypt had been stagnant for some time before the Rashidun, in case you didn't know. Besides, who do you think is responsible for the creation of Kufa, Basra, al-Jazira, Fustat, and Musal?


Perhaps you have a more upbeat biography for him. :)

Well, that depends on whether or not you're ashamed of his warrior status. Personally, that's what makes me admire him so much. Or...do you hate all other magnificent conquerers like Genghis and Alexander?

Obliterated Egyptian civilization? More like helped it. Egypt had been stagnant for some time before the Rashidun, in case you didn't know. Besides, who do you think is responsible for the creation of Kufa, Basra, al-Jazira, Fustat, and Musal?The people who did all those things are not "Egyptians," the people of the Pharaohs. They are Arabs, the people who occupied Egypt, marginalized its native Cushitic people, and overlaid their civilization with the Islamic branch of Mesopotamian civilization. The armies of Caliph Omar destroyed one of the world's six precious and unique civilizations, just as the armies of Europe destroyed that of the Olmec/Maya/Aztec and that of the Inca, overlaying them with the Christian Greco-Roman branch of Mesopotamian civilization and marginalizing their people. Thanks to the armies of Islam and Christianity, half of the world's irreplaceable civilizations are lost to us forever. These are the greatest atrocities that have ever been perpetrated by human beings. (I give a modicum of credit to the Arabs for not destroying all traces of Egyptian civilization: the Christians actually melted down the art of the New World peoples. But to say Omar's armies were slightly less evil than those who conquered the New World is, I hope, a perfect example of damning with faint praise.)

The Arabs who now live in Egypt are no more "Egyptians" than the Anglo-Normans who now live on Britannia are "Britons," the Celtic people whom they conquered, marginalized, and replaced. The Brythonic language of the Britons is lost. Fortunately the Egyptians had invented writing so their language is preserved, since much of their writing was carved in stone that resisted the pyromania of Omar's hoodlums.
Well, that depends on whether or not you're ashamed of his warrior status. Personally, that's what makes me admire him so much. Or...do you hate all other magnificent conquerers like Genghis and Alexander?To steer this discussion back onto firmer linguistic ground, a "warrior" is a person who dedicates his life to defending people who cannot defend themselves--his own people or others in need. A warrior is not driven by vanity and does not conquer other peoples in order to inflate his image. Alexander, like Abraham Lincoln, was perhaps originally motivated by a desire to protect the nation he served by strengthening it, but they both ended up debased by hubris, solidifying and/or expanding their empires by dishonorable means in order to earn a place in the history books. Genghis Khan was a megalomaniac and a textbook example of a sociopath who was obsessed with glory. He killed at least ten percent of the civilian populations he came in contact with for no other reason than his own vanity. This puts him in a class with Hitler: unpardonably despicable vermin, blots on the history of our species.

In America we are developing a tradition of letting the names of outrageous villains fall into obscurity, denying them what they strove for: a place in our memory. After a contemporary rock star took the surname of a California cult murderer, a practice was begun of referring to more recent mass murderers only as the Oklahoma City Bomber and the Beltway Snipers. It's a long shot, but perhaps the knowledge that one's name will not be remembered will reduce the motivation for high-profile crimes.

In that trend, perhaps the Nazi leader should only be known as the Master of the Holocaust. As for the Mongol butchers, I get great joy from the fact that the patient Chinese people simply lulled them into decadence and absorbed them without violence. He is forgotten in the best possible way: What little he achieved has been erased, at least within that country.

Peace and harmony are the cornerstones of civilization. Anyone who kills and destroys is, by definition, not civilized, unless in self-defense against a direct threat from someone else who became uncivilized first.

Forgive me for allowing this thread to digress into politics via history, but Caliph Omar caused one of the world's greatest languages to become extinct.

The people who did all those things are not "Egyptians," the people of the Pharaohs. They are Arabs, the people who occupied Egypt, marginalized its native Cushitic people, and overlaid their civilization with the Islamic branch of Mesopotamian civilization. The armies of Caliph Omar destroyed one of the world's six precious and unique civilizations, just as the armies of Europe destroyed that of the Olmec/Maya/Aztec and that of the Inca, overlaying them with the Christian Greco-Roman branch of Mesopotamian civilization and marginalizing their people.

You seem to generalize Islamic and Christian based conquests, and wrongfully compress them into one category. Spanish colonialism into the Americas, and their treatment/annihilation of the then present Aztecs/Maya/Incas is substantially different from the Caliphate’s growth from inner Arabia to Egypt (the West) and Persia (the North). As you erroneously imply, Omar’s conquests never directly lead to the destruction of the Egyptian civilization or extinction of any languages present there. The Egyptian civilization (prior to Omar) was always subject to change, and its deterioration was only a natural evolution (recall, Egypt had been in a stagnant and declining state for many years before Abu Bakr/Omar). A new lifestyle and language was introduced to the Egyptians, who readily accepted it because it was a stronger force to be part of. Languages aren’t erased by killing every speaker of it, until it’s lost completely. Introducing a more popular language that is part of a more powerful empire will naturally attract people towards it anyway. How do you think the Native American languages of today are being forever forgotten?


Thanks to the armies of Islam and Christianity, half of the world's irreplaceable civilizations are lost to us forever. These are the greatest atrocities that have ever been perpetrated by human beings. (I give a modicum of credit to the Arabs for not destroying all traces of Egyptian civilization: the Christians actually melted down the art of the New World peoples. But to say Omar's armies were slightly less evil than those who conquered the New World is, I hope, a perfect example of damning with faint praise.)

What civilizations did the Muslim (Arab) armies remove from history (preferably by Omar)? Staying on the topic of Omar, he actually aided the construction of many (aforementioned) cities. Atop of this, Omar did not loot/burn to the ground the cities he captured. Rather, he lived amongst them, building libraries and vital infrastructure that are still admired today. Considering this digression of topic occurred on the basis of Omar, I will focus more steadily on him. Unless I have accidentally skipped a few pages when reading my old history books, I cannot recall a time where a civilization was erased at the hands of Omar. The Omar I’ve read was the founder of cities, and an integral catalyst in the progression of civilization from the tribal men of Africa to the desert nomads of Arabia.


To steer this discussion back onto firmer linguistic ground, a "warrior" is a person who dedicates his life to defending people who cannot defend themselves--his own people or others in need. A warrior is not driven by vanity and does not conquer other peoples in order to inflate his image.

This is where you are mistaken. Contrary to your beliefs, a warrior is not someone who dedicates his life to defending the helpless, as you put it. A warrior, as defined by any dictionary (and as defined in regular dialogue) is a person well engaged/experienced in warfare; someone who has shown great vigor in battle. Keeping in mind these specific qualities of a warrior (based off dictionary descriptions), it is safe to say that Omar was deservingly a warrior. Conquering other people to inflate his own image was not of Omar’s principles, which is evident through his lifestyle and wartime policies. Did Omar steal all of Persia’s wealth and live lavishly like a King? Did he round of the civilians of the conquered regions and use them for pincushions? I’m afraid (for you) that the answer to both questions is “no”.


Alexander, like Abraham Lincoln, was perhaps originally motivated by a desire to protect the nation he served by strengthening it, but they both ended up debased by hubris, solidifying and/or expanding their empires by dishonorable means in order to earn a place in the history books. Genghis Khan was a megalomaniac and a textbook example of a sociopath who was obsessed with glory. He killed at least ten percent of the civilian populations he came in contact with for no other reason than his own vanity. This puts him in a class with Hitler: unpardonably despicable vermin, blots on the history of our species.

Of course all of these historical figures were obsessed with glory to varying degrees, and all likely committed some sort of atrocity (as perceived today) throughout their lifetime. Who could disagree to that? Certainly not me. However, we must give credit where it is due: these were some of the most influential, skilled, and powerful men in history, whose actions have helped shape civilization as we know it today. Despite their wrongdoings (however abundant), credence and some sort of appreciation/admiration must be given. It would be a crime to hold their unworldly achievements in contempt due to your abnormal hatred of them.


In America we are developing a tradition of letting the names of outrageous villains fall into obscurity, denying them what they strove for: a place in our memory. After a contemporary rock star took the surname of a California cult murderer, a practice was begun of referring to more recent mass murderers only as the Oklahoma City Bomber and the Beltway Snipers. It's a long shot, but perhaps the knowledge that one's name will not be remembered will reduce the motivation for high-profile crimes.

Then it becomes a battle of what crowd you are attempting to appease. If you refuse to offer media attention in vast portions to events like the Oklahoma City Bombing, then you’re likely to face loud controversy. Another example is the mall massacre that just recently happened: if you don’t feed that event the publicity it warrants, then there will be complaints in mass numbers, exclaiming that it deserves attention to raise awareness. They will argue that ignoring the event will make people turn a blind eye toward issues like necessary mall security, which in turn will lead to more events of the like.


In that trend, perhaps the Nazi leader should only be known as the Master of the Holocaust. As for the Mongol butchers, I get great joy from the fact that the patient Chinese people simply lulled them into decadence and absorbed them without violence. He is forgotten in the best possible way: What little he achieved has been erased, at least within that country.

The Chinese, in my opinion, turned out to be very lucky. Genghis Khan obliterated their Northern regions with unexpected ease, and stole all their treasure and material of value. If it wasn’t for the Mongol Empire’s lack of culturally-binding capabilities, China could (and most likely would) have faced much longer repercussions. The Mongols were weakened to withdrawal not by the Chinese, but by the Middle Eastern and Indian armies predominately (see Mamluks, generals such as Zafar Khan, battle of Ain Jalut). China seized advantage of Mongol misfortune that happened thousands of miles away.


Peace and harmony are the cornerstones of civilization. Anyone who kills and destroys is, by definition, not civilized, unless in self-defense against a direct threat from someone else who became uncivilized first.

Civilization, in order to advance, needs conflict, as history will show. It is small wonder why progression in all fields of knowledge occur during or immediately after some sort of conflict or conquest. Ultimately, you cannot view historical events (especially those which occurred 1400+ years ago) with the modern eye. What is deemed impermissible and uncivilized today may very well have been the exact opposite a millennium ago, which is why it is unfair to judge such actions by today’s laws and moral codes. The aftermath of Omar’s actions are well-documented and publicly recognized to be much more beneficial than harmful; they are acknowledged to have been prime advancers of Middle Eastern and African civilization, not destroyers of.

Mine is Michael. Gift of God or somesuch. Merely an addendum, or a hope. Yet, my parents weren't religious. So...

My husband's is Forrest, my son's is David, and my daughter's is Maurene.

Every parent should give their children an unusual middle name, so that they have something to blackmail them with in later life. So don't call them Fred Bloggs, call them Fred Aloicius Bloggs. Baby photos naked on a rug are also handy, as are photos showing off missing teeth.

I think they should give them those kinds of middle names to make them unique. So many girls have Ann or Marie as a middle name.BORING!!

Mine is Halley. The comet was in the sky the night I was born so my parents thought it'd make a cool middle name.

My parents actually did something really cool with our middle names. They let us choose our own. I was six when I chose mine. My brother was twelve when he chose his.
They wanted us to have names both given and chosen.

I think that's a pretty good approach as to whether supply one or not.

Mine is Michael......man thats so original!

My parents actually did something really cool with our middle names. They let us choose our own. I was six when I chose mine. My brother was twelve when he chose his.
They wanted us to have names both given and chosen.

I think that's a pretty good approach as to whether supply one or not.

I can't even imagine the hassle that would be. My kids were both given SS#s after birth. I'd have a lot of paperwork to change.

I'm sure it was a bit of trouble, but I'm glad for it though.

My middle name is my mom's middle name. That seems to be the norm in Brasil... Why? Dunno. :shrug:

Just passing on of the name. Sounds normal to me..

I can't even imagine the hassle that would be. My kids were both given SS#s after birth. I'd have a lot of paperwork to change.These days, the citizens are trained to expect government intrusion into their lives from the moment of birth. It's becoming increasingly common to fingerprint babies. Microchips like they put in dogs and cats can't be far behind. Surely the next generation will have DNA samples on file and a GPS in their neck. (Remember the clever way they trained a whole generation of kids to endure arduous commutes by calling it "busing" and claiming it was really in the interest of racial integration?)

If you change a child's name today I'm sure you have to go to court and file the necessary documents just as if it were an adult. Oddly, the only bastion of tradition that is allowed to proceed under common law in the U.S. with no oversight by the legal system is a woman taking her husband's surname.

And even that doesn't work reliably. My wife was off the Social Security radar for 35 years because she worked for a municipal government that did not collect SS taxes. But when she turned 55 and their system began to attempt to send her notices advising her of her (non-existent) pension, instead she got a notice saying that there was a discrepancy between her SSA file and her IRS file. She had to dig up our 20-year-old marriage certificate and go stand in line for two hours while they figured out what to do with it.

....If you change a child's name today I'm sure you have to go to court and file the necessary documents just as if it were an adult. Oddly, the only bastion of tradition that is allowed to proceed under common law in the U.S. with no oversight by the legal system is a woman taking her husband's surname......

I was thinking that too. "Surely it couldn't be any harder than changing my last name"
Yeah, wrong. They'd ask for adoption papers, but there are none. We just wanna change it. :shrug:
I had a friend who was named Mary Beth at birth. Three months later her parents decided they hated it and changed it. But that was 40 years ago, and the gvmt probably was as involved.

She had to dig up our 20-year-old marriage certificate and go stand in line for two hours while they figured out what to do with it.

As soon as you need to deal with officialdom, you start to understand what a refugee feels like.

As soon as you need to deal with officialdom, you start to understand what a refugee feels like.Not refugees, just serfs. The U.S. has created a modern version of the old feudal system, with corporations as the new aristocracy.

Not refugees, just serfs. The U.S. has created a modern version of the old feudal system, with corporations as the new aristocracy.

Probably the subject for a new thread, but I'm warming to corpocracy since they started demanding a global energy policy.
I know it's motiated by self-interest, as they are only wanting a world in which commerce is possible in 50 years, but at least it is rational.

What an irony for the Greens if their old enemy Corporates saved the world.