Judge orders lesbian mother removed from her child’s birth certificate

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is hard to believe that 7 years after the Obergefell decision that established the right to same sex marriage, and the Pavan v. Smith case that same-sex parents of children conceived by a sperm donor and/or birth surrogate should both be listed on the child’s birth certificate, just as is done for different-sex couples who have kids the same way, we have this sort of inhumane treatment of a lesbian.

Where is the equality established in 2015 by the two aforementioned cases? This would never happen with an opposite sex couple. The fact that the sperm donor subsequently petitioned the court for custody does not change that.

Judge orders lesbian mother removed from her child’s birth certificate

Same-sex parents are being encouraged to legally adopt their own children in order to prevent a court from revoking their custodial rights...

www.lgbtqnation.com

 

[Sunni Man]

Good for the child in not having two mentally deranged dykes listed on the birth certificate. ...

 

[TNHarley]

because she had no biological relationship to him — being the “non-gestational” caretaker — and because Williams hadn’t formally adopted the child. Williams’ name should be replaced by the name of the sperm donor who was now petitioning the court for custody of the child, McGuire decided.
Color me shocked a lying federal supremacist left out the most important piece of the puzzle.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

because she had no biological relationship to him — being the “non-gestational” caretaker — and because Williams hadn’t formally adopted the child. Williams’ name should be replaced by the name of the sperm donor who was now petitioning the court for custody of the child, McGuire decided.
Color me shocked a lying federal supremacist left out the most important piece of the puzzle.

Thank you for demonstrating the fact that you are not bright enough to actually understand the issue which is that this would NOT HAVE HAPPENED with an opposite sex couple

The fact that the sperm donor is seeking custody is irrelevant and a separate issue

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

It is hard to believe that 7 years after the Obergefell decision that established the right to same sex marriage, and the Pavan v. Smith case that same-sex parents of children conceived by a sperm donor and/or birth surrogate should both be listed on the child’s birth certificate, just as is done for different-sex couples who have kids the same way, we have this sort of inhumane treatment of a lesbian.

Where is the equality established in 2015 by the two aforementioned cases? This would never happen with an opposite sex couple. The fact that the sperm donor subsequently petitioned the court for custody does not change that.

Judge orders lesbian mother removed from her child’s birth certificate

Same-sex parents are being encouraged to legally adopt their own children in order to prevent a court from revoking their custodial rights...

www.lgbtqnation.com

What exactly is it that you people disagree with?

Sunni Man

www.usmessageboard.com

TeeDub

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Thank you for demonstrating the fact that you are not bright enough to actually understand the issue which is that this would NOT HAVE HAPPENED with an opposite sex couple

The fact that the sperm donor is seeking custody is irrelevant and a separate issue

Who is the child's father?

 

[TNHarley]

Thank you for demonstrating the fact that you are not bright enough to actually understand the issue which is that this would NOT HAVE HAPPENED with an opposite sex couple

The fact that the sperm donor is seeking custody is irrelevant and a separate issue

prove it. Prove that an unmarried man with no biological link to the child would be put on the BC.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

prove it. Prove that an unmarried man with no biological link to the child would be put on the BC.

What the fuck are you talking about. Where did I say that an unmarried man would be put on the birth certificate ? The two women were MARRIED

 

[TNHarley]

What the fuck are you talking about. Where did I say that an unmarried man would be put on the birth certificate ? The two women were MARRIED

WERE married. Do you know what the word "were" means?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

WERE married. Do you know what the word "were" means?

So what! If a man and a woman were married, they are both still legal parents after a divorce. It is possible that you are too obtuse to understand that this case was treated differently because they are two women?

 

[TNHarley]

So what! If a man and a woman were married, they are both still legal parents after a divorce. It is possible that you are too obtuse to understand that this case was treated differently because they are two women?

SHE HAD NO TIES TO THE CHILD YOU STUPID MOTHER FUCKER. She was like an ex step parent. Step parents dont have rights, much less ex step parents.
Stop your hate and THINK
Do you understand now?

 

[Vastator]

because she had no biological relationship to him — being the “non-gestational” caretaker — and because Williams hadn’t formally adopted the child. Williams’ name should be replaced by the name of the sperm donor who was now petitioning the court for custody of the child, McGuire decided.
Color me shocked a lying federal supremacist left out the most important piece of the puzzle.

That’s good precedent for every man that has been cuckolded by unfaithful women.

 

[Vastator]

So what! If a man and a woman were married, they are both still legal parents after a divorce. It is possible that you are too obtuse to understand that this case was treated differently because they are two women?

That is exactly correct. God forbid they hound this woman for money, like they would a man in the exact same situation.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What the fuck are you talking about. Where did I say that an unmarried man would be put on the birth certificate ? The two women were MARRIED

Bullshit. There is no such thing as “marriage” other than between a man and a woman.

And no child comes to be except by a father and a mother. One of each, not two (or any other number) if one and none of the other.

Only one of these women is the child's mother, and a man is the child's father.

That's hard science.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

So what! If a man and a woman were married, they are both still legal parents after a divorce. It is possible that you are too obtuse to understand that this case was treated differently because they are two women?

This case was treated differently because it is different. Are you too obtuse to understand the basic biology?

The child only has one mother and one father.

 

[BackAgain]

Good for the child in not having two mentally deranged dykes listed on the birth certificate. ...

We don’t need the pejoratives. I am curious as to which lesbian is the sperm donor, though.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

We don’t need the pejoratives. I am curious as to which lesbian is the sperm donor, though.

I forgot how stupid you are. Thanks for reminding me

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

This case was treated differently because it is different. Are you too obtuse to understand the basic biology?

The child only has one mother and one father.

Go back and read the OP Bobby Boy. It is not about biology. It is about the law and legally two women married to each other are the same as a man and a woman .

When one party to a marriage has a child, there is a presumption of parenthood of the other party regardless of whether or not that person is a biological parent(Pavan v. Smith as per the OP link)

This divorce judge in effect terminated the parental rights of Kris Williams. YOU CANT DO THAT in a divorce proceeding. End of story

It is not I who is the obtuse one here

 

[TNHarley]

It is not I who is the obtuse one here

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

What's your take on it Hartley.? How am I wrong?