posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 09:34 PM
Originally posted by traderonwallstYou did make assumptions. And as far as I am concerned they are assumptions that are WAYYYYY out
Assuming he had sex with the coworker to get her pregnant is not an assumption thats 'way out there'..
it's a viable theory. The FACT that
he's asked for paternity tests
suggests they didn't use labs at all.. in fact it suggests he's not even sure she was a lesbian. Lesbians
aren't really prone to having sex with various men and I doubt very much other men would have stupid enough to consent to such an arrangement without
Almost to the point as being ridiculous (without any kind of evidence).
You haven't provided any evidence that the lesbians were in the wrong.. you've just said 'thats not fair' repetively.
I bet the mothers never truly saw him as a father but just a donor.
In fact he had alot of contact with the kid in his younger years.. with visits, prezzies and cards. HE asked for his name to out his name on the BC to
give the kid 'a sense of identity': ie. know who his father is
. Thats called a 'benefit'.
moved away from him. Doesn't sound like he complied with the 'absent sperm doner with no benefits' at all.. he made a point of
making sure his son knew who his father is.
Anyone can have an opinon, just as long its viable. Your opinion, is not viable unless there is some kind of proof. Your opinion is just way
to far out in left field.
yep, yep, yep..
Thats a few times you've said that yet.. without actually explaining WHY it's illogical you just keep abusing me for it.
And when the hell did I evere turn anything into a discussion about gay bashing or woman hating?
You've tried to shoot down all opposing arguments [well mine] as being 'ridiculous'.. and if you'll bother to look, you'll see the very next
following my last one makes a snide, biggoted remark about feminists.
That is what happens when you don't allow others to voice their opinions. This is now the 2nd post of mine you've publically dismissed as being full
pf assumptions. FACT is most men who donate sperm sign contracts where they sign away their rights to the child. He gave a verbal agreement
[apparently] yet HE broke it. This is reported in the story so how is it an assumption? His excuse is just as weak as any man who's said "but she
said she was on the pill." He's a wealthy, married doctor.. not some college student who got paid to donate in a cup one day. Why would he not seek
legal advice before donating his sperm? Something else went on.. and thats not an assumption.. thats stating the obvious.
[edit on 3-12-2007 by riley]