🔥8752

This being America, perhaps you thought two consenting adults would enjoy the freedom to name their progeny whatever the hell they want. Your baby your choice, be it Kale or Lakynn or Gunner or Insta or just a collection of numbers and symbols chosen seemingly at random. Apparently, though, Big Government would like to rein in one celebrity couple’s personal naming liberties, barring them from putting “X Æ A-12 Musk” on their child’s birth certificate because it does not comply with California “law.”

A “a supervisor at the Department of Public Health Vital Records Office in Los Angeles,” where baby Grusk is presumed to have been born, told TMZ that legal names may only incorporate letters from the English alphabet, no numerals or special characters allowed. This poses a problem for troublingly overconfident billionaire Elon Musk and singer Grimes, who just announced — with apparent earnestness — that their newborn son would be called X Æ A-12. On Tuesday, Grimes laid out a detailed explanation for this unconventional selection: “X” stands for “the unknown variable,” while Æ is the “elven spelling of Ai (love &/or Artificial intelligence.)” A-12 equals the “precursor to SR-17 (our favorite aircraft). No weapons, no defenses, just speed. Great in battle, but non-violent,” and “A=Archangel,” a reference to her favorite song.

Well, it would appear that the pair can call their child this — assuming they know how to pronounce it; I certainly do not — but they cannot log it in California’s official records. I can only imagine how this development is going over with our big truck-loving boy. By now we all know how much Elon values his “goddamn freedom.”

Related Posts

R. Kelly’s Chicago Trial Postponed, Authorities Find Over 100 Electronic Devices

So … Megan Thee Stallion and G-Eazy Had a Good Night

Bon Iver, Florence + the Machine Drop Songs; You Can Pretend Its Festival Season

Check Out The New Music Video For ‘Drag On’ By Priceless Scott

Halsey Is Very Sorry for Accidentally Calling for Another 9/11

Quincy Jones Loses $6.9 Million From Jackson Estate Case Appeal