In the south, it's quite common to give little girls names that are also family (last) names as first names. My own daughter has a "last-name-first-name." I think it's quite traditional, but I guess because I was born after 1900 I've been tainted with modernism in your eyes. 
I don't have a Hunter or a McKenzie, but I like those names a lot better than Elbert or Bertha.
It's not so much "modernism" as it is anglo post-Christianity. How many people go by initials in the South? It certainly is as tendency to move away from the idea of patron saints - a person's first name is called their "Christian" name - what's Christian about a last name put first? How can one christen their child at Baptism with that and not in some sense showing less reverence than is due? It seems to be characteristic of a non-Christian mason dominated culture.
I can't believe you think Hunter and McKenzie are better than Elbert and Bertha (not that
anyone would have to choose those names in particular[/quote]
And while I think TKGS was joking, I know of a trad family with seven children who all have saints names, and there really is a Polycarp and Athanasius in there. Poor boys. Totally ridiculous. Starshine and Moonbeam would have been better.[/quote]
You really think so? Starshine and Moonbeam better than names of saints? Maybe some saints names sound eccentric but they are given to honor saints - an intention that should not be treated with irreverent mocking of putting "starshine" and "moonbeam" above the name of a Catholic saint.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius_KircherCan you imagine this man's name as Starshine and Moonbeam?
I think you should analyze your way of thinking and consider whether or not it's heavily influenced by very crude and childish prejudices that you have possibly imbibed from other women in this culture.