Location: Somewhere out there beneath the pale moonlight.
Rep Power: 20309
Atheist
Pinko Commie
Slogan/motto:
Really?
Reputation:
August 17th, 2011, 10:09 AM
I always thought that birth certificates were used to track biological kinships (not that women don't [often] lie about who the real father is) instead of who "raised" you .
So much for using birth certificates to track parentage anymore .
"The more scientifically literate, intellectually honest and objectively skeptical a person is, the more likely they are to disbelieve in anything supernatural, including god."
Is it still moral degradation when a straight couple uses a sperm donor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Sorceror
Stripe, I support homosexual rights in all forms. I see them as equal to heterosexuals in all ways. I always have.So no, I don't see any degradation going on here. Just two parents in a dispute with a dumb donor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusha
It's impossible to see something that isn't there ... Being that the birth certificate is a *legal* document, I am not necessarily convinced that his name should be taken off of the document.However, IMO, the man relinquished his relationship of fatherhood when he decided to donate his sperm. Do we know how old the child is?IF there is a relationship with Mr. Donor, IMO, for the sake of the child, that is something for the judge to consider.There was no demand. This man was not FORCED into donating his sperm. The sexual orientation of the couple is not in question. This is about a biological parent and whether or not he went into this arrangement with a reasonable expectation of being recognized as the LEGAL father of the child in question.
Not willing or not able to see?
There are very obvious consequences for a group of people who can never know who both their biological parents are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent Hunter
I always thought that birth certificates were used to track biological kinships (not that women don't [often] lie about who the real father is) instead of who "raised" you .
So much for using birth certificates to track parentage anymore .
Exactly. And the dangers of such a practice should be obvious.
Location: Somewhere out there beneath the pale moonlight.
Rep Power: 20309
Atheist
Pinko Commie
Slogan/motto:
Really?
Reputation:
August 17th, 2011, 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stripe
Not willing or not able to see?
Well , I don't see the practice as any sort of "moral degradation" .
Quote:
There are very obvious consequences for a group of people who can never know who both their biological parents are.
Exactly. And the dangers of such a practice should be obvious.
Certainly there are certain biological issues at stake in that a brother and sister could unknowingly have a child , but I think the chances are slight .
"Wait !! We can't have sex until I see your birth certificate to make sure we aren't too closely related" .
Yeah , right , like anyone has ever done (or ever will do) that .
"The more scientifically literate, intellectually honest and objectively skeptical a person is, the more likely they are to disbelieve in anything supernatural, including god."
Slogan/motto:
Of course you realize this means war! ~ Bugs Bunny
Reputation:
August 17th, 2011, 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stripe
Not willing or not able to see?
Not able ... there isn't enough information on this case.
Quote:
There are very obvious consequences for a group of people who can never know who both their biological parents are.
Adoption happens all the time. Closed and open. I am, in most cases, opposed to open adoptions, and therefore, do not believe the birth parent should always be on the birth certificate.
Unless agreed to previously, this man has no rights to the child. Putting his name on the birth certificate opens the door to having *rights*.
Quote:
Exactly. And the dangers of such a practice should be obvious.
Putting aside your obvious disdain for homosexuals, feel free to explain why it should be *obvious*.
Well , I don't see the practice as any sort of "moral degradation" .
Certainly there are certain biological issues at stake in that a brother and sister could unknowingly have a child , but I think the chances are slight .
"Wait !! We can't have sex until I see your birth certificate to make sure we aren't too closely related" .
Yeah , right , like anyone has ever done (or ever will do) that .
There are very obvious consequences for a group of people who can never know who both their biological parents are.
I'm sure the hospital keeps the donor on file or some such thing if it needed. A birth-certificate is just as much a legal document as anything else and shouldn't have an anonymous party (which most donors are) on it with no stake in the child's life. The point of donating sperm isn't to actually be a parent.
Quote:
Exactly. And the dangers of such a practice should be obvious.
Humor me here, because I must be missing something. What is the obvious danger?
Slogan/motto:
It's only the fairy tales they believe.
Reputation:
August 17th, 2011, 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stripe
...can you not at least concede that the notion of a birth certificate and its integrity has a very important function. Any nation that perverts the legal status of the biological parents sets its citizens up for seriously unhealthy relationships.
A birth certificate documents legal, not biological parenthood, and isn't a medical record. The real injustice is that the sperm donor was listed as the father in the first place.
Eternal life is an easy promise to make and a hard one to fulfill.
A birth certificate documents legal, not biological parenthood, and isn't a medical record. The real injustice is that the sperm donor was listed as the father in the first place.
Are adopted children's birth certificates changed upon adoption?
Well , I don't see the practice as any sort of "moral degradation" .Certainly there are certain biological issues at stake in that a brother and sister could unknowingly have a child , but I think the chances are slight ."Wait !! We can't have sex until I see your birth certificate to make sure we aren't too closely related" .Yeah , right , like anyone has ever done (or ever will do) that .
How will you ever know?
We know for a fact you do not have any data with which to back up your implication that it will never happen and we know for a fact that common practice is making the situation ever more likely. And there are stories out there of it actually happening.
God set out laws about who we might marry for a good reason. Homos have no regard for God and thus His commands are not even considered when it comes to "protecting their rights". And that is regardless of how obviously correct they are.
Stripe, I support homosexual rights in all forms. I see them as equal to heterosexuals in all ways. I always have.
So no, I don't see any degradation going on here. Just two parents in a dispute with a dumb donor.
If homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality, why are homosexuals 19 times more likely to get HIV worldwide, why do they account for a majority of cases of HIV in the US and why do they account for about 2/3rds of the cases of syphilis? Why are homosexuals constantly more prone to mental health problems?
Homosexuality leads to disease, depression and early death.
Normalizing homosexuality is as brainless as normalizing heroin use.
And, kids need a mommy and daddy and suffer without both.
If homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality, why are homosexuals 19 times more likely to get HIV worldwide, why do they account for a majority of cases of HIV in the US and why do they account for about 2/3rds of the cases of syphilis? Why are homosexuals constantly more prone to mental health problems? Homosexuality leads to disease, depression and early death. Normalizing homosexuality is as brainless as normalizing heroin use. And, kids need a mommy and daddy and suffer without both.
And normalisation of their perversions leads to all sorts of unworkable scenarios. But trying to argue against homosexuality by saying kids should always be able to know who their parents are is fighting while on retreat. Note how the pro-homosexuals cannot even concede this simple point.
If homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality, why are homosexuals 19 times more likely to get HIV worldwide, why do they account for a majority of cases of HIV in the US and why do they account for about 2/3rds of the cases of syphilis?
Because of a bad subculture? Also remember that those statistics only apply to homosexual men. If you understood all the factors there, you'd know exactly what those numbers mean.
Quote:
Why are homosexuals constantly more prone to mental health problems?
Its tough living in a society that hates you.
Quote:
Homosexuality leads to disease, depression and early death.
Suuuure, buddy.
Quote:
Normalizing homosexuality is as brainless as normalizing heroin use.
Not even close.
Quote:
And, kids need a mommy and daddy and suffer without both.
.
Being that the birth certificate is a *legal* document, I am not necessarily convinced that his name should be taken off of the document.However, IMO, the man relinquished his relationship of fatherhood when he decided to donate his sperm. Do we know how old the child is?IF there is a relationship with Mr. Donor, IMO, for the sake of the child, that is something for the judge to consider.There was no demand. This man was not FORCED into donating his sperm. The sexual orientation of the couple is not in question. This is about a biological parent and whether or not he went into this arrangement with a reasonable expectation of being recognized as the LEGAL father of the child in question.
.
Linear Mode
