Posted on 01/24/2014 4:50:25 AM PST by Kaslin
There is so much wrong with the following story that like other great art that imitates life, I think I’ll let the story mostly speak for itself…and many of the ills of society in general.
So, stop me if you heard this one….
Two lesbians put up an ad on Craigslist looking for a sperm donor.
This is not in dispute.
They put up an ad on Craigslist looking for sperm, like sperm are a couch or a T.V. or those old worthless beanie babies your haggard aunt collected.
In response to the ad, one William Marotta, who apparently thinks of his sperm as a couch or a T.V. or those old worthless beanie babies his haggard aunt collected, was subsequently chosen as the "donor"-- a.k.a. the father in olden times parlance.
Marotta it turns out “donated” sperm three times, according to the birth mother, who subsequently “used a syringe to inseminate.”
These facts are not in dispute.
And do you know what?
A child was born. A daughter to be exact, although labeling her as a daughter is rather old fashioned of me.
Nevertheless, the child is a daughter whose parents are one William Marotta, willing victim and father, and Jennifer Schreiner, mother, lesbian, dupe and duper.
Turns out that there was a good reason for Schreiner and her partner, Mr. or Mrs. Schreiner, mother part deux, lesbian, dupe and duper, to use a free ad on Craigslist trolling for sperm donors and willing victims.
They did it because they're poor. They couldn't afford to pay the fees associated with artificial insemination through a doctor.
This is the part where Art takes over, the jerk.
When one is poor, one might not be able to afford a child either, which the last time I checked-- that is daily as the parent of a 16-year old-- is MUCH more expensive than artificial insemination.
So, Mrs. and Mr. Schreiner, like all good American these days, eventually applied for welfare benefits to take care of their daughter. It's only right that the Schreiners should lay off the financial duty of taking care of their daughter on you and me.
And the state, like all good Americans, asked: “What about the father?”
Oh no; like all good Americans, the state wasn’t concerned with his rights, or the psychological benefit a man might have in his “daughter’s” life.
The state was about the money.
When anyone applies for welfare benefits, both parents are examined for financial support, as is right.
Marotta and Schreiner both produced copies of contracts – albeit different versions—that acknowledged that one William Marotta, was indeed nothing more than a sperm donor and a willing victim and father.
Not good enough says the state, which doesn’t want to pay out welfare benefits for just anyone.
It seems the state's position is that the sperm was not procured through a medical doctor as is required by law. In order to be transubstantiated from the outdated father-mother model to the new, improved mother-mother model, the sperm donation, according to humanists, has to be touched by a doctor.
Fish meet bicycle.
Apparently the humanists at the Kansas state legislature believe that sperm must first pass through their highest of high priest’s hands, the “medical doctor,” in order for fatherhood-- that is confirmed by sperm’s DNA-- to be stripped from a man and transferred to a women pretending to be a man, pretending to be a woman, who can then be the father in the only two senses that matters to the welfare state—legally and financially.
Or something.
“We stand by that contract,” says one of Marotta’s attorneys, Benoit Swinnen. “The insinuation is offensive, and we are responding vigorously to that. We stand by our story. There was no personal relationship whatsoever between my client and the mother, or the partner of the mother, or the child. Anything the state insinuates is vilifying my client, and I will address it.”
Too bad says the state, which wants Marotta to pay child support.
I’m relieved that there was “no personal relationship” with THAT women.
Oh wait, no I’m not.
Yes, I am. Oh, wait….
What a mess.
I don’t know anyone who might have any valid reasons to question the wisdom of homosexuality as a lifestyle, artificial insemination or gay marriage.
You know, besides overturning millennia of legal, ethical and moral thought on these subjects.
Only racists and homophobes would do that.
And those type of people are obviously the very people who are uncomfortable with Art imitating life.
Because it isn’t like Art has a daughter involved in this, right?
It's only a child, after all. And he was only the "donor".
Who now pays child support for a child he never wanted yet willingly fathered.
The liberal faith in the power of the legislature can't change the DNA evidence.
Good Job American Humanists!
Another grand creation.
Oh well. When you play God, as Mary Shelley taught us, you end up with a few Frankensteins. All you have to do now is kill the monster.
Stupid, stupid, stupid..
No good deed goes unpunished.. Get a free baby bug on line, and even if you dodge the bullet and not get the Heebeegeebees, you open up a can of worms..
Oh, and the volunteer donor, welcome to the new reality, ungrateful recipients.. Who would have thunk?
I don’t bother with Craigslist anymore.
Kansas lawyer here. I’ve read the relevant statutes. On the radio yesterday somewhat idiot talk show hosts were confusing artificial insemination with in vitro fertilization. The later is very expensive. I’ve tried that case. The former, I don’t know the cost but I can’t imagine that it would be terribly expensive. The statute all are referring too is in the parentage act under the title presumptive parent - and it excludes a man from being the father if and only if he donates sperm through a licensed medical facility. So it is a specific exclusion and is outside of the statutory and common law.
The statute then that provides for artificial insemination - Chapter 23 Article 23 of the KSA, is designed for a husband and wife. Just a reminder - no “gay marriage” in Kansas - yet.
I’ve seen freepers on this subject say that this is unfair to the man. Oh puleeze. If you go around passing out your DNA to strangers, you can expect consequences.
And it is a legitimate concern of the state to require that both parents support the child. The other “mother” has no legal obligation under Kansas law to support this child. She might have some sort of common law right to visitation but no obligation to support her.
So this is a lousy way to make a baby. No one can force either of these biological parents to be good and decent people but the state can force them both to support the child until she turns 18 or graduates from high school, whichever is the last to occur.
So it does not matter what route was taken by the DNA, it doesn’t matter that the woman and her partner had/have same sex attraction, it only matters that the child carries this man’s DNA and that the very narrow exception to the obligation was not met.
Are you saying that you found a new way to sell your sperm? :=)
Its still the best place to find a used laptop.
What **I** don’t get is, if they didn’t want to pay a doctor, why didn’t they arrange anonymous insemination the old-fashioned way ??
You know, wait until fertile, go to a singles’ bar. . . and get drunk. . .
The guy is a prostitute.
One stupid enough to give his real name.
Women desiring a child and failing to achieve one within marriage have turned to male prostitutes when discretion was required for thousands of years.
The company that manufactured the turkey baster in all likelihood has deeper pockets than “Spanky” the sperm donor.
Agreed
Sounds like KS will be next in line to adopt “gay marriage” to (not) resolve this matter.
Because that would require PIV sex, and militant feminists are utterly against that. It's "violence against women."
If not for the “guarantee” that the State would pick up the tab for raising the child,
these “poor lesbians” wouldn’t even have considered trying to have one.
As Forrest Gump’s Momma used to say...
“Sperm is like a bullet. It’s out of your control once it leaves the barrel, so you better make darn sure you’ve taken careful aim before pulling the trigger.”
lol lol, Bob you beat me to the point....logic, would dictate, as the subject was the use of Craigslist as a source of sperm...then not using Craigslist, would imply a different sperm source....
I’ve seen similar things happen. The lesbian issue is irrelevant to the state.
When a mom shows up asking for welfare, if there is a husband, he is expected to pay for the child. So if Mom is legally married, it’s difficult to get welfare.
So when an unwed mom shows up, they ask, who is the father? if the father, biological or legal, is around he is expected to pay child support, not the state.
If the unwed mom can’t name a biological or other father (and they are clever with who gets DNA testing), then welfare is granted (all of this explains why it is that there are so many unwed moms on welfare- it makes the best financial sense if you want free money).
So when this mom showed up with a biological father, the state knows just what to do, sock the dad with child support. It’s what the system is designed to do.
If this results in a new welfare law saying that the biological father MUST pay child support UNLESS the unwed mom is a lesbian, you can bet that the “lesbian” box on the form will be checked before the “initial here, and here” is done.
Nothing but homos on Craigslist. I looked!
The lesbian should be charged with fraud, neglect and child abuse, practicing medicine without a license, and anything else that fits, get sent to jail, and have all her parental rights terminated. The child goes to the father, who then gives it up for adoption.
Best possible outcome for all involved.
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.