New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Re: Raegan for a girl?
in reply to a message by Caemlyn
No. Regan is a legit (though, I think, highly unattractive) girl's name. Reagan is the surname of a president. Raegen just looks misspelled and is pronounced like the president's surname, not the girl's name. If you want to name her after Rachel, I'd use Rachel. If you're ashamed to honour her, I don't understand how that's honouring.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Nobody said ANYTHING about being ashamed
I'm not ashamed to honor her,I just don't want to cause an uproar. Wouldn't you think my mother would be a tad bit upset if I named a child after her sister-in-law, but not her?
I'm not ashamed to honor her,I just don't want to cause an uproar. Wouldn't you think my mother would be a tad bit upset if I named a child after her sister-in-law, but not her?
1
I'm sorry, I guess I misread it. It does seem like if you're trying to hide the fact that you're honouring someone, whatever your motive, there's not a lot of point in the honouring. Just to me. And I don't know how your mother would feel since I don't know her, but I wouldn't fly into a screaming rage if my child (or someone else close to me) named their kid after someone and it wasn't me.
1
Having a child named after oneself is an honor bestown. No one has the right to expect it. No one has the right to be upset if it's not done. I know my mother gave my older sister her aunt's name as her middle name, and not her mother's. If my grandmother was upset about that, I guess she never said anything about it. If she had, I'm sure I would have heard about it. I agree there's no point in honoring someone if you're trying to hide the fact, whatever the reason.
1
nt.
1