It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: mamabeth
I also remember a while back that a guy who supplied his sperm for a same-sex couple.When that couple
split up HE had to pay child support.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
That story is so sad! The state blackmailed the lesbian couple, telling them that if they didn't reveal the sperm donor, the child couldn't get health care. He had even signed a contract with the couple, relinquishing all rights and responsibilities to and for the child, but the state ruled it null and void, because the insemination wasn't performed by a certified doctor. The couple is working with the biological against the state's decision.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: LSU0408
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Krazysh0t
There is a paper trail involved in those procedures. All of the medical information is on record and available upon request.
As AugustusMasonicus pointed out in cases of sperm bank donation, the legal husband (not the sperm donor) gets listed on the birth certificate. So why should homosexual couples be treated differently?
Because the mother of the child in Augustus's link signs the BC after she gives birth. When has a homosexual ever given birth? Do you understand the wormhole this creates when you guys constantly cry about equal rights? This is not equality, you're looking for special privilege rights. Men can't have a baby together. Women can't have a baby together. That's what nature says, and no amount of protesting and crying will change that. They simply can't give birth to a child.
That's completely asinine. Lesbian couples have children with no problem.
Utilizing a sperm donor.
Just like hetero couples do.
Gay men adopt children.
Just like hetero couples do.
What happens when a child is adopted? The original birth certificate, with the original last name, is sealed and a new one is issued under the new last name.
Literally nothing you've said applies to anybody other than gay couples. Hetero couples do the exact same thing every damn day as what gay couples do, but it's different because queer, right?
Get your bible out of other people's lives.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: LSU0408
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: LSU0408
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Krazysh0t
There is a paper trail involved in those procedures. All of the medical information is on record and available upon request.
As AugustusMasonicus pointed out in cases of sperm bank donation, the legal husband (not the sperm donor) gets listed on the birth certificate. So why should homosexual couples be treated differently?
Because the mother of the child in Augustus's link signs the BC after she gives birth. When has a homosexual ever given birth? Do you understand the wormhole this creates when you guys constantly cry about equal rights? This is not equality, you're looking for special privilege rights. Men can't have a baby together. Women can't have a baby together. That's what nature says, and no amount of protesting and crying will change that. They simply can't give birth to a child.
Lesbians can't give birth? Wow. That's news to me...
You think they're gonna scissor together and make a baby or are you purposely being obtuse?
No I'm saying that a lesbian couple can go to a sperm bank and get sperm to have a baby. Just like a heterosexual couple can do the same. You are the one being obtuse here. I've laid out what I mean plain as day, yet you are purposely trying to muddy the waters with stereotypes and bias.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: kaylaluv
You missed the last part where it says "if their state allows it..."
It's not discrimination just because you disagree with it.
It's not discrimination if the state doesn't allow it regardless whether the man's partner is a male or a female. It IS discrimination if they allow it for the man's female partner, but not for the man's male partner.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408
You may or may not be a bigot, but your education on gay rights and tolerance for gay causes is sorely lacking. You don't appear to be up to speed knowledge-wise on what you are talking about either.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: LSU0408
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408
Apparently you don't know what "gay" is... You do know that women can be gay too, right?
Tell that to the LGBTQ... They're all gay, so why do they need a moniker to distinguish themselves?
Actually, no that isn't true. Transexuals or transgendered aren't necessarily gay. Bisexuals probably consider themselves as gay as they consider themselves straight. Seriously, open up a dictionary written within the last few years and not in the 1950's.
I don't know what they prefer, so why don't you tell me who I can properly refer to as a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer, that way none of them try to call me a homophobe or bigot for disagreeing with them. Can you do that for me?
They'd prefer to be treated like completely straight people, but apparently asking such things is just TOO much to ask for, because you can't even be bothered to understand the entire situation before throwing out your opinion.
originally posted by: LSU0408
This whole "equal rights" thing hit the ground and exploded when it should have had a plan laid out to hit the ground running. Just be patient and everything will work itself out.
originally posted by: LSU0408
It's not the Bible that tells me two men can't screw and produce a child, nor can two women.
originally posted by: WeDemBoyz
a reply to: Krazysh0t
They'd prefer to be treated like completely straight people, but apparently asking such things is just TOO much to ask for, because you can't even be bothered to understand the entire situation before throwing out your opinion.
What you said here, reminds me of a quote that appropriately applies:
“Opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding. The highest form of knowledge… is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another’s world. It requires profound purpose larger than the self kind of understanding.” ― Bill Bullard
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: LSU0408
You can get biological parents info on other documents kept on file if you choose to seek it. That's assuming that both biological parents are even known. Sometimes, the woman doesn't know who the father is. Life goes on.
originally posted by: introvert
So much ignorance and stupidity coming out on this issue.
Krazy, what the hell were you thinking posting this thread?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408
Maybe, but you'd have to apply that to heterosexual couples too then.
originally posted by: mamabeth
originally posted by: LSU0408
originally posted by: Bluntone22
When someone is listed on a birth certificate they have financial obligations with laws on the books.
Does the same type laws apply to same sex couples?
Not sure if that has been ironed out yet..
Good question. And who keeps the kid when the couple splits? Betcha that can get real ugly.
I also remember a while back that a guy who supplied his sperm for a same-sex couple.When that couple
split up HE had to pay child support.
originally posted by: Glassbender777
I live in Arkansas, and although i'm not a hater for gays and Lesbians, I don't think its a good idea, to mess with a Birth Certificate, Why in an earth would two people who did not Birth the actual baby be put on the certificate. I think this has more to do with making the same sex couples mentally feel better about themselves, not the child. what does it matter who's name is on the Birth certificate, as long as they are Legal Guardian. Whoever the biological people are, should be on the Birth Certificate, Not going to say Biological parent, because to be considered a parent in my eyes, means exactly that, to Parent a child, not just give birth to them.
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: LSU0408
Which says nothing about a homosexual couple. That talks just about the mother having the child. I think the gay couple should fill out adoption papers or whatever it is that they have to do. Not a birth certificate though.
The point is that for heterosexual couples since the beginning of sperm banks the donor is never known and the husband's name is on the BC, also for adoptions an amended BC is done with the new parents listed and the real parents are not traceable. For Surrogate births the court will instruct the hospital to enter the Intended Parent's names on the birth certificate and not the real mother/father names.
So though your argument makes sense it really isn't how it is ever done, so I'm trying to understand how in this case it would be different.
originally posted by: Klassified
originally posted by: LSU0408
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: TheLotLizard
Sure, because a birth certificate is supposed to be for genealogy and disease prevention, not for ownership like a pink slip for a car.
I agree with this. I think ALL information should be available on the BC. They shouldn't be doing this for hetero's or gays, because it's a lie in both cases. Nevertheless, if they're going to do it in one case, the law says they can't discriminate, and not do it for the other.
I doubt anyone would have an issue with all that info being on there. Those two queers, or gays (whatever is the proper term for them) are gonna feel pretty bad the first time their kid gets a shot of penicillin and swells up and dies because they didn't know it was allergic. Or when they take it in for a doc appt and can't tell the doctors of any family illnesses that may be hereditary. But hey, who cares, right? At least their names are the only names on the BC.
I agree, but the issue is more than a gay issue. This same thing can happen in the case with a hetero couple, who went this route, and the adoptive father/mother is listed as biological, instead of the true biological parent. This is an issue across the board.
The OP is still correct, in that gays are being discriminated against for no logical reason, considering they do this with heteros without question. In my opinion, it is unthinkable that this is a practice at all, whether straight or gay.