This is a very interesting case. . the first of many more that are a result of the utter confusion wrought upon Family Law as a result of the redefinition of marriage. The bottom line is that the traditional perspective and the basis of Family Law is that the child has a RIGHT to be raised and cared for by both a Father and Mother. Gay Marriage throws this fundamental right into the dust. . .and thus. . children suffer.
1 posted on
01/23/2014 3:42:30 PM PST by
McBuff
To: McBuff
I notice that this is a female judge....genetically programmed to f**k men over to provide resources to
a child. Further proof that men should never get
married or father children in the USSA. The game is
rigged and the rules completely one sided.
2 posted on
01/23/2014 3:44:59 PM PST by
nvscanman
To: McBuff
To: McBuff
the parties didnt involve a licensed physician in the artificial insemination process and thus Marotta didnt qualify as a sperm donorSee what happens when you try to save a few bucks? It probably never occurred to them that lawyers had written the law to make themselves money.
The more this happens, the better. It's wrong to sell or give your child to crazy people. If men understand that they're going pay just as much as if they'd had a child with their own wife or girlfriend, maybe they'll stop doing it.
4 posted on
01/23/2014 3:46:25 PM PST by
Tax-chick
(Well, that went badly.)
To: McBuff
Hey, they’re entitled. They probably even get big incomes from government employment or government-linked business to maintain their influence as bipartisan political constituents.
5 posted on
01/23/2014 3:48:05 PM PST by
familyop
(We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
To: McBuff
“Family law” has been anti-family law for a long time. It was turned solidly against fatherhood during the ‘80s and ‘90s. It’s a cash cow for “professionals” and just another way to prevent domestic competition (working class families) from rising. It’s much of the cause of the economic decline.
6 posted on
01/23/2014 3:52:44 PM PST by
familyop
(We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
To: McBuff
"Shawnee County District Court Judge Mary Mattivi rejected that claim, saying the parties didnt involve a licensed physician "
I agree. Gotta be legal with a licensed doctor. Pretty simple. If not it sets a messy precident of he said/she said paternity suits.
To: McBuff
11 posted on
01/23/2014 4:05:48 PM PST by
TwelveOfTwenty
(See my home page for some of my answers to the left's talking points.)
To: McBuff
I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, a father is a father and must support his children. All the details are of a lower priority to that father's obligation.
When a man spits in the face of God, he deserves no mercy.
13 posted on
01/23/2014 4:08:12 PM PST by
Tau Food
(Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
To: McBuff
Dude should turn the tables and drag them into court and DEMAND custody on the grounds that they are an unfit couple.
But it appears he's not too bright in the first place.
17 posted on
01/23/2014 4:16:09 PM PST by
ConradofMontferrat
( According to mudslimz, my handle is a HATE CRIME. And I HOPE they don't like it.)
To: McBuff
1] The child suffers because he/she is being allowed to be raised by 2 pervs. I notice the court has zero to say about it.
2] How did this case get before the state in the first place? Did the bltches rat him out?
3]The idea that this guy owes the state some $6k is utter crap.
Run, young feller...those women wanted to be the parents...they should be responsible...not him.
18 posted on
01/23/2014 4:18:33 PM PST by
Adder
(No, Mr. Franklin, we could NOT keep it.)
To: McBuff
One wonders if the intent all along was to find some poor sap to defray the cost of raising the kid, knowing they could sue for child support. Be interesting to know some more of the details of this case.
20 posted on
01/23/2014 4:23:13 PM PST by
DemforBush
(Come and get one in the yarbles, if you have any yarbles, you eunuch jelly thou!)
To: McBuff
He should have gotten a lawyer and signed away parental rights. End of case.
21 posted on
01/23/2014 4:25:03 PM PST by
RginTN
To: McBuff
The man was ignorant and did not heed the recommendations of a famous quote from a movie:
I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltrators, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the International Communist conspiracy to sap and impugn all of our precious bodily fluids....I do not avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence
Base Commander Jack D. Ripper
Jack may have had a point when Lesbians were in question.
To: McBuff
The artificial insemination industry is going to take a hit
29 posted on
01/23/2014 4:52:07 PM PST by
SeminoleCounty
(Amnesty And Not Ending ObamaCare Will Kill GOP In 2014)
To: McBuff
so does this mean that any sperm donor is now on the hook for child support????
this ruling is insane.
31 posted on
01/23/2014 4:57:08 PM PST by
ealgeone
(obama, border)
To: McBuff
Photos at link...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-court-rules-sperm-donor-william-marotta-is-legal-father-and-must-pay-child-support-9079296.html
Jennifer Schreiner and Angela Bauer, who have now separated
The state was seeking to have Mr Marotta declared the child’s father so he can be held responsible for about $6,000 in public assistance the state provided to the childs mother, as well as future child support.
Kansas does not recognise same-sex marriages and Ms Bauer could not legally adopt the child, despite continuing to care for her after they separated. When one of them became unwell and had to seek state support, the Kansas Department for Children and Families (KDCF) demanded they reveal the name of the sperm donor, which they eventually did.
The KDFC filed the case in October 2012 seeking to have Mr Marotta declared the father of the child born in 2009.
37 posted on
01/23/2014 5:55:14 PM PST by
kcvl
To: McBuff
So why not have the state go after the lesbian husband? I mean if a man is cuckolded by his wife and she claims he is the father he is usually stuck even if he has DNA proof that he isn't the father. Courts in such cases often say that the need to support the child trumps the guys DNA evidence.
39 posted on
01/23/2014 5:59:53 PM PST by
Robert357
(D.Rather "Hoist with his own petard!" www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223916/posts)
To: McBuff
All the more reason to stay away from queers and definitely not to get involved with them.
40 posted on
01/23/2014 6:02:22 PM PST by
RetiredTexasVet
(It's difficult to differentiate between a hog calling contest and a Senate rollcall.)
To: McBuff
He shot an arrow in the air,
It fell to earth he knew not where.
43 posted on
01/23/2014 6:54:34 PM PST by
YHAOS
To: McBuff
Indeed. It’s all about what the adults want, not the children. Sad.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson