Shared publicly  - 
 
State officials have orded a KS man to pay child support after he donated his sperm to a same-sex couple. He says he's a victim of discrimination. 

#Kansas  
25
10
Jimmy Bowman's profile photoAngel S's profile photoMelissa Larson's profile photoscott roussel's profile photo
53 comments
 
Ahhh Well then nope no play no pay...
 
Given the millions of hetero couples who are just as unable, you're not saying much. 
 
No. I didn't care to read it.
 
I wonder if sperm donor qualifies you as father in Kansas ? Sounds like a state worker is confusing the law. 
 
+Paul Jewkes I don't care to listen to lazy, ignorant loudmouths, there's no shortage of them in the world. Blocked.  
 
Again.. No Play no pay, this will cause lots of people who donate to no longer donate due to the fear of the "States" coming after them for child support....
 
+Orion McClurg It doesn't seem to have stopped millions of deadbeats in the cities. Of course, most of them are already fugitives to start with.
 
You are assuming they conceived using the missionary position. If he gave her a test tube, he really didn't "play". 
 
So, if this stands, sperm banks are going to have a hard time getting donors.
 
+Margaret Leber ahh yea this was a donation with no "I am a father moment" so no play no pay.. It was not the same as "dead beat  dads"
 
You say that like there was an "I am a father moment" for millions of those baby daddies.

There wasn't.
 
If you ladies can't tell the difference between a turkey Baster in a clinic and unprotected sex on a couch, and e cannot have an intelligent discussion of these issues. 
 
He was not the dead beat dad that was one of the ladies there +Margaret Leber what about her? What just make the man pay did you even read the article?
 
How can he be held accountable for raising a child he wouldn't otherwise have a claim to? He better claim the kid on his taxes. 
 
Okay, I have no place to comment on marriage since it is as religious issue; But, this is messed up. You don't penalize people for helping to bring life into the world on those terms and call yourself 'pro-life'.
 
While I am not for gay "marriage", I do feel Kansas needs to rethink this one. If any couple seeks a sperm donor, egg donor or surrogate, they become responsible for their creation, not the donor. If that couple splits and falls on hard times, their children should be able to apply for assistance just like all the other families that have fallen on hard times. 
 
+Orion McClurg I read the article. Did you read my comment? The baby daddies don't have an "I am a father" moments and yet they continue donating sperm...and will continue doing so until there are unavoidable consequences. 

The State will come after anybody they can plausibly claim is a parent, if there's a chance of collecting some cash from them  to recoup all their expenses paying for babies, whether they're a result of turkey baster therapy, or a hot pork injection.

It doesn't have to make sense, and it certainly doesn't have to meet your idea of "fairness" or mine.
 
No mystery: they're going after him because he has money, and they need to pay for all the welfare they hand out. 
 
so does that mean that every child who was fathered with a sperm donor is entitled to child support if the mother applies for aid to families with dependent children?
 
I think that if people had to pay child support for children they put up for adoption (if they were capable), or that if parents had to pay exceedingly high taxes for every child they had which was incarcerated, people would rethink when they had children, how they had them and how they raised them.  Parents determine the what kind of person their child is (largely), they should be held accountable when that person grows up and creates problems. So I say, when a child is incarcerated, then shift the burden onto the family. The parents aren't bad people, nor are they being punished. They just 'raised their kid their way' and now they are going to be held accountable for their actions (or lack thereof). Under this logic, if might be acceptable to collect child support from a sperm donor. With all of the crime, all of the abortions and all of the poverty going on in this country, it is irresponsible to bring children into this world in large numbers until we build a nest so to speak.
 
This is weird. I thought it was under animosity.
 
...and I thought it was donated, and therefore purchased.
 
Let's make it fair was my point. If a guy is accountable just for donating sperm, then parents are, to some extent, accountable for the choices of their adult offspring, because they raised them. This is a terrible idea and there is no doubt about that. But, if courts uphold this then they should hold everyone more accountable. That was my argument. If you can't instill citizenship, and raise your child to be a member of polite society, then you should not be a parent!
 
I thought donations were anonymous?
 
You think you've heard everything, and then... First off, I couldn't be a seem donor! I consider my seem to be a part of me and all those before me. If I were to donate my sperm, then then exists the possibility that in the world somewhere is MY son or daughter. I couldn't live knowing a part of me is out there, but will never know where they came from... Never know their unique history. having children via a sperm bank is ver selfish of anyone.

So, I have mixed feelings about this. I'm going to have to think on this one!!!!
 
Most centers pay the donor, and it is purely a business transaction for them. The procedure is capitalist-objectivism at it's purest.
 
What part of Kansas Law do they (the two women) not understand? Kansas does not recognize same-sex marriage. My heart goes out to the children involved here. For the sake of our children, we need to promote families with husbands and wives who love and support each other raising their children together. 
 
Unfortunately you are seeing why 54 million plus abortions have been committed since 1973, because of sperm donors who refuse to step up to the plate of Fatherhood..  If homosexuals want to live together in a civil union they should give up rights to having children, for this only fractures and hurts the concept of family, it does not help it (family where you have a Father and Mother for each child).  My Father was killed by a drunk driver when I was 2 weeks old, and it was not his desire or choice to leave me or my Mother.  Same sex marriages never produce children because they can't biologically speaking - it's not natural for this to be so.
 
+B Ambrose - it's not the women going after the man, it's the State. Not sure how your argument makes much sense, given the number of hetero-marriages with children that end up in divorce. Does your heart not go out for them too?

Would you feel the same if this was a hetro couple where maybe the man was sterile for some reason, they had a kid via a sperm donor, than later divorced? 

Despite feelings on same-sex marriage, I don't see how that is relevant to the state going after the donor in a situation like this.
 
And who says that having a wank won't cause problems? lol :P
 
Stories like this remind me why I'm glad I don't live in a Red State like Kansas. What a joke.
 
+Rob Portinga "...given the number of hetero-marriages with children that end up in divorce. Does your heart not go out for them too?"

Yes my heart goes out to any child from a broken home and single moms. Ultimately, we as a Nation should be addressing the breakdown of Marriage and families. The future of marriage is not going to be decided by our likes or our dislikes. Losing a healthy marriage culture has produced all kinds of pain, practical costs and penalties. Measured by social pathologies that impose a great weight on our society, like depression, addiction, violence, illness, missed educational and economic opportunities. No matter how you look at it the intact biological family continues to be the best for the children. “Department of Health, Education and Welfare” when it comes to raising the next generation. Marriage is worth fighting for, even if we lose.
 
Thats the law stupid it's no discrimination ....they always go after the guy, that's the law in 50 states! And you was dumb enough to give it to give2 woman won't can't take care of a baby
 
I think they would only be anonymous if you go through a professional means of obtaining a sperm donor, not necessarily craigslist....
 
An easy fix. Don't donate sperm. People are the dumbest critters on the planet.
Translate
Adam K
 
His case cannot stand; he's not met the protected classes of US Anti-Discrimination Law through his complaint.

They are, if interested:

1. Age
2. Religion
3. National Origin
4. Race
5. Color (to me this relates to race but this relates to the law)
6. Marital Status
7. Gender
 
Would this even be an issue if the couple in question were heterosexual? Heterosexual couples have problems conceiving all the time - the ONLY reason this is even an issue is because of the sexual preferences of the couple in question.
 
Honestly I think it still would be an issue +Jeremy Tregler . If you read the article, and I'm not saying you didn't, you would've read that the couple adopted eight children total in their lives. I think the 'state' is saying that they are tired of paying for them. The question here is not sexual preference of the couple at hand, but the financial competence of the couple at hand. If you're going to adopt children, which is very noble and heart lifting, then you'd better have the financial wherewithal to do so. The couple at hand, again regardless of sexual preference, is VERY irresponsible indeed. But there is a chance I'm completely misinformed about the situation, however, that is what I took from the article.
 
+Bobby Reynolds I did read the article, and I did see that the couple has taken on more responsibility than they really should have. But the question of financial responsibility falls to the family, not the donor. This would be the first time (that I've seen) where a donor is called for support rather than going after the legal family members. The question here is whether the donor had any right since they apparently went through "Craigslist" rather than a legitimate donor agency, so that makes the situation even more sticky, pardon the pun (not really). Still, the birth certificate does not list the biological father. The State is overstepping their bounds here, but I'm not surprised given that they're a Red State.
Paul F.
 
In hindsight, he should have used the safer route so he wouldn't have found himself in such a mess. 
 
Jonathan, I agree! I have been married a few times, I have never asked for child support or alimony. Sometimes we just make mistakes,
 
Stupid decision and unfair pursuit by the State. However, the donor knew it was going to a legally unmarried couple. Therefore there is some culpability on his part in feeding into the disrespect for the law. Disrespect for the law and sexual perversion may be overlooked by most, but they do have their consequences. 
Add a comment...