Skip to comments.Iowa Supreme Court rules both lesbian spousesí names should be on childís birth certificate
Posted on 05/03/2013 10:23:16 AM PDT by newgeezer
The Iowa Supreme Court Friday affirmed a district court ruling that both spouses in a lesbian marriage should be listed on a childs birth certificate.
The court ordered the Iowa Department of Public Health to reissue a birth certificate to Melissa and Heather Gartner, of Des Moines, for their daughter, Mackenzie Jean, who was born in September 2009. The department refused to list Melissa, the nonbirthing parent, on the birth certificate.
It is important our laws recognize that married lesbian couples who have children enjoy the same benefits and burdens as married opposite-sex couples who have children, the court wrote in a 29-page decision issued Friday.
By naming the nonbirthing spouse on the birth certificate of a married lesbian couples child, the child is ensured supported from that parent and that parents establishes fundamental rights at the moment of birth, the ruling states.
The Supreme Courts 2009 Varnum vs. Brien decision legalizing same-sex marriage provides the bedrock for Fridays decision, the court noted.
What about the child who may need to know who their biological father is? hmmmmm
This is nothing less than state-sanctioned child abuse.
I WISH that an EF5 Tornado would hit Des Moines and WHIPE it off of the map!
They put the non-biological father on the birth certificate ALL THE TIME. The law doesn’t care about DNA, they care about the law. The husband of a woman who gives birth is legally the father - even if he isn’t the biological father. Kind of a messed up situation for some - their wife cheats on them - gets pregnant - and they are legally responsible for support of the resulting child.
Fun fun fun!
And when polygamy becomes law, how many names will go on birth certificates?
Well, in this day and age, I’d like to see a “partner”, spirtual, emotional or otherwise be potentially held legally responsible for a life they commit to being, transitioned or sustained in whatever manner in support of their deviate lifestyle.
I actually see this as a stakehold in repsponsibility that lashes the other, not child-bearing partner, to a potential financial responsibility other than the poor schmuck man they may or may not have tricked into their deviate schemes.
Bring it on! Make both of them carpet munchers responsible for that life they misdirected and probably ruined. I say good.
Put the turkey baster on there too then - it had more to do with the baby than the “other” “mother”.
Let me add that I believe no child should be put into this kind of setting. But then I worry more about the well being of the child than I do about the "fundamental rights" of her so called "parents".
Where do they list the sperm donor? After all, he is the biological father.
And when the 2 lezzies break up - What man will they sue for child support?
They don’t. See post #5.
That’s why laws against incest will be annulled. No legal way to keep track as it is.
After polygamy comes... Yep, you guessed it.
After the moose bit my sister - she married him. Had a baby.
So now my nephew’s birth certificate shows Bull. J. Winkle as the daddy.
(This story while not true - is no more bizarre than two bull dykes as parents on the BC)
I guess the biological father doesn’t count..
This is going to really mess up genealogy research down the road. What they deem as “cute” or politically correct... roadblocks that child from finding out their true heritage or bloodline. Also, just gives them something else they can hate you for when they want answers to, “where is my Dad?”
Already happened... they sued the donor in court for child support, and won. I believe it was a recent court case in Kansas.
It is also important that birth certificate follow scientific principles of reproduction and list the genetic parents from whom the offspring has sprung, a genetic paper trail, if you will, which may be valuable later in life in diagnosing disorders and charting mutations.
Poor kids. As if they don’t have enough crap in their lives.
I guess they want to turn kids into freaks to be more in tune with our enemies.
Would it help prevent this ?
TOPEKA, Kan. A sperm donor is being ordered to pay child support to a couple he helped have a child.
William Marotta says he gave up all legal rights to the little girl.
But under Kansas law, because the couple didnt use a doctor to get pregnant with Marottas sperm, the state says hes responsible for the monthly child support payments, according to FOX 4.
Marotta met the lesbian couple through a Craigslist ad seeking a sperm donor.
Marotta is an idiot. I have no sympathy for him. Let the femi-nazi pro-butch courts rape him a new one.
If your article tells the whole story (and, if this was Kansas), a doctor would still be required to absolve the sperm donor of any responsibility. (Why is that? Why isn't a contract sufficient? Is the doctors' lobby that strong in KS?)
Actually, Mackinzie is a bastard. All else is just window dressing, pig lipstick.
You must not watch the Disney Channel. If you had, you would know that you can go anywhere in your imagination.
Interesting argument here...
I've scoured our constitutions again and a again, and no matter how many times I look, the legislative branch is the only branch with lawmaking power given to it.
It did no such thing. Courts don't make laws. Iowa law to this day recognizes only real marriages.
And then a year later, the ‘father’ claims ‘that’s not my child and I dare you to prove that it is’!
Well, yeah, and there was the recent case of the sperm donor guy who got sued for child support after the two “parent” queers split up. This is all “bedrock “of course.
What an evil, Frankensteinian thing to do to human beings.....denying the Truth and Natural Law and artificially constructing an irrational reality for a child so he can not grow up in a realistic world. Always governed by “feelings” and never reaching maturity where Reason rules the emotions.
How evil and dehumanizing and selfish are these Marxists.
And to think we have a ‘Justice” system that denies Natural Laws (Science) and Reality and Truth. It is disgusting and evil and unconstitutional.
All Just Law has to be Right Reason.
so be "married" you stupid idiots but you can't both claim parentage....its biologically impossible....
let this be a lesson...never let a dtr or niece or anyone female you know give up their baby to just anybody....make sure the child gets to a normal home with a normal marriage...
This is quite literally a coup d’etat. The overturning of our republican form of representative self-government.
And the Republican “leadership” is complicit.
I’m so mad I could spit nails.
This is Varnum II.
it'd be like letting an elephant and a woman be the official parents of a human baby because the elephant is strong and muscular and could protect the baby...
Deeper into the abyss.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
ON the subject of ‘deep abyss’.
I understand that since MD has instituted/passed/signed the ‘do funny marriage bill’ that come 1JAN if a ‘couple’ are partners and NOT MARRIED, they will revert to just another shack up and will not be able to share bennies UNTIL they get married.
Watch the FALLOUT from this little act.
Not only will ‘they’ be suing because the state is FORCING them to marry, once they WIN (and surely they will) the regular shack ups will declare that since the ‘do funnys’ can share bennies without getting married, then the straight shack ups should get bennies also.
And figure that not soon after, conventional room mates (as we know them..share house/apt etc WITH NO SEX INVOLVED) will be clamoring to get in on the act.
SO FAR this just is for State Employees BUT you can imagine the rest of the state will attempt to follow suit. (Dependent on who ‘benefits’ from it).
These new rules are making my hairline ache.
It is important our laws recognize that married lesbian couples who have children enjoy the same benefits and burdens as married opposite-sex couples who have children,
Even if we have to make it all up out of thin air!!!!!
I don't mean to be hating on homosexuals....but its gone just too damn far especially when it comes to the welfare of a child...
Welcome to Bizzarro World.
Why is this basic concept so difficult for a modern, educated, civilized society to grasp?
Because “the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” ...
let’s get this straight, two woman cannot produce a child, so a child, any child, when born is not the result of human reproduction of two women and yet a “birth certificate” - a certificate recording the result of an act of human reproduction, which cannot be an act achieved by two women, is suppose to lie about what “a birth” means and state, in error of the facts, that the child’s biological mother and her girlfriend are both “mother” of the child
it makes no sense whatsoever and the fact that it makes no sense stands regardless of anyone’s opinion about anyone being “gay”
Birth certificates are not supposed to be ownership registrations.
of all the problems we face in this country and there are still some who seem intent on their sexual turn on and making it look like they’re a family.
These people need to stop this nonsense, it makes them look insane and mentally backwards.
The fact is that it takes a male and a female to make a baby
plain and simple
these people need to get a life
You are right. So it isn’t a birth certificate.
I knew a kid raised as a basket case by lesbians. I’m sure he’s committed suicide by this time.
“married lesbian couples who have children enjoy the same benefits and burdens as married opposite-sex couples who have children,
Sorry, but I’m going to have to say it:
Except for the di*k benefits.
So “parent” doesn’t mean PARENT anymore. Is that what they’re saying?
The bastard’s mother is the parent, the other is a nurturer
It's at least plausible that another man could be the father. But there is absolutely no way that this combination is possible.
Just another example of the re-definition of marriage also redefining parenthood and a multitude of other realities.
And, whoever controls the debate gets to define the terms.
For example, who the **** knows (or cares) what "infringed" means anymore?
The very first time the SCOTUS handed down an anti-Constitutional ruling and it was allowed to stand, the writing was on the wall. The actual words in the Constitution mean NOTHING. Dubya's Chief Justice John Roberts made that quite clear with his Obamacare insanity. That may have been the final tipping point. Our precarious 5-4 majority is dissolving before our eyes and will soon be gone. "God Bless America" indeed. He did, even while America kept telling Him to get lost.</rant>