Skip to comments.Iowa Supreme Court rules both lesbian spouses’ names should be on child’s 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.
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” ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.