If the state say´s he should pay then if he so desires shouldn´t he be able to take custody of the child?

This article illustrates perfectly what our society is moving to. Lesbian and homosexual marriage, abortion on demand, no religion, big gov´t controlling your every movement, welfare, entertainment violence, tax the rich, class warfare, education system that places the USA in the bottom internationally, no morals, tattoos, body piercings, me first syndrome, rudeness, shootings, drugs, road rage, police abuse, corruption, cheating, immigration chaos, and a black Pres that endorses and participates in every bit of what I just said.

Garbage, garbage, garbage - is what USA has become.

He should go for custody of his child, AND child support from the 2 crazy women.
What´s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Too stupid to live, but not too stupid to breed. Homo sapiens are some of the dumbest primates on planet earth.

What #2 said.

The pictures explain why they are lesbians.

Another domino-string of idiotic policies and decisions.

I´m saving your comment, #4. A wonderful summary of a situation that doesn´t have to exist.

The political and social situations in our nation are beyond surreal!

Lest I repeat myself, IT DOESN´T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY!

Good. treat him like a parent. You should not be allowed to contract out reproduction. There should not be a gestational carrier or a sperm donor recognized under the law.

Apparently, one can change from homosexual to heterosexual ...

Moving on: Jennifer Schreiner posted this picture with a man believed to be her new partner since the end of her relationship with Angela Bauer.

This whole situation smacks of child abuse and neglect.

I pity that poor lil girl.

Outrageous government decisions in the family law area is why marriage is dying out in the US. Men don´t want to incur the unlimited liability.

They adopted 8 children?! Who is taking care of them now? And who says that ugly women can´t find a man?

Holy, Moly. What have we allowed ourselves to become. My late parents and grandparents would not believe this.

Mega dittos to what poster #2 said!!!

These Freak Show Contestants have been allowed to adopt 8 children...

Celebrate diversity.
/s off/

OH. Dear. Sweet. Jesus.

God owes an apology to Sodom and Gomorrah...

Totally agree # 2.

This is a very interesting example of how contracts between agreeing people are not binding if the law will not support them.

As a former debt collector, whenever I had to call someone regarding an unpaid debt for their child, where BOTH parents were responsible, many times the debtor on the other end would tell me that his or her ex spouse was ordered to pay that for the child and that the person I was calling was "not responsible for payment."

Except that contracts such as that are binding only on the individuals and the court, if entered into in court. It is NOT binding on anyone else which also means creditors. So, even though these three people entered into a contract, that was binding on all of them, that does NOT mean they get to go to someone else to foot the bills under the same terms when the funding has to come from outside their little contractual circle.

So, if you want to "donate" something and agree to give up all rights and responsibilities to the people who receive the donation, you better make sure the law supports your position in ALL instances, or you will be held accountable, and rightly so.

I should clarify....parenting plans that are entered into a court, which is essentially what these three agreed to, a parenting contract, is binding ONLY on the parties involved and the court if it is entered into the court as a court action. Other than that...it is not binding on anyone else, so theoretically, the "donor" could also be held liable for all expenses related to his progeny DESPITE his signing his rights over. He did not sign them over in accordance with the State of Kansas and that is why this has come up.

#2, I know exactly how you feel!!! Our society is out of control.

#10, one person does not exemplify all people. Obviously, she is bi-sexual which means that she is one of those who can make choices. Most people fall somewhere along a continuum from 100% hetero to 100% homo. Very few fit the 100% category, but the vast majority are on the hetero side. This is not taking into account environmental issues like abuse and familial dysfunction or mental issues that can create confusion. Anyway, just because some people can choose who to be with, only means they are attracted to both and are more in the middle of the continuum. But it doesn´t mean they all can. I doubt many of you can choose to be with someone of the same sex. It would gross you out. That is how someone who is toward the 100% gay side feels about the opposite sex.

FTA: "Moving on: Jennifer Schreiner posted this picture with a man believed to be her new partner since the end of her relationship with Angela Bauer."

Translation: Jennifer Schreiner is a sexually confused, brain-dead, spoiled,nincompoop who shouldn´t be allowed anywhere near a child, much less be allowed to adopt and raise 8.

#6 hits the nail! When you look like that, you have two choices in life: live alone or be a lesbian.


Girl´s Hubby

In that state, they are single women and the state made the right call. Still, this is wrong on so many levels. Giving up parental rights voluntarily does not shield from having to pay up. It happens in heterosexual cases too. Otherwise men would just walk away to avoid support.

Apparently, the two women did not want to force him to pay anything, the state is forcing him. They could have done the honorable thing and not throw him under the bus. Custody does not seem to be an issue in this case. However the state may not deny him if he chooses that route. If he does, it may be to strike back at the women and the state, but poor kid.

This is a cautionary tale for men who make private deals with lesbian couples; they can come back later and make parental claims. But so can single gals and married gals who made babies with not their husband. What tangled web our society is weaving. Head hurts.

Our future is in the hands of our children and we treat them like this? What on earth does this teach them?

God have mercy on America!

The sad thing is, most guys won´t hear about this because they didn´t read this article. And they´ll be victimized by lesbian couples who have read this story.

I wou1dn´t be so sure that 1ast person Jennifer is posing with is a man.

Scrub society clean of God. Pretend that homosexual behavior is normal. What do you get?

Very easy solution to all this.

Since the woman supports the donor and is on his side, let the court ruling stand. He pays her $500 a month (or whatever) and she simply pays it right back to him.

Whatever happened to natural law?

I read that these women are not seeking this, but the State of Kansas is.

They applied for Welfare (don´t they get benefits for adopting 8 kids)? THey had a contract, but since they used a turkey aster instead of a licensed doctor, he is not protected.

To top it off one of the ´children´ they adopted is 25 years old. And people today make fun of the Ozzie and Harriet era...

#22, who the heck cares about "what she feels" or "when he chooses" or "whoever/whatever they are now attracted to" etc. etc.

Obligations are obligations. Duties are duties. They do not depend on your on-and-off feelings. Children have rights which are natural, are imprinted in the bodies and minds, and are necessary for their life-long-flourishing.

#1 in the list of rights is, of course, the right to life = the right to just go on living, not to be assaulted, terminated, or murdered.

But right #2 is closely akin to it, and this is: the right to the support, provision, and nurturance of your natural father and mother, bound by the commitment we have always called "marriage".

That´s what sex, love, and marriage are supposed to be about: the bond of one man and one woman to each other and to the children born to them. They have the duty to acknowledge the child as bone-of-their-bone and flesh-of-their-flesh, to love and care for their child as such, because this is what every child needs to humanly flourish.

Pack up your "I feel" and "I want" and store it with the rest of your kindergarten memorabilia. An adult says: "The child´s needs come before my feelings and wants."

...And these three idiots vote...Democrat

#28 - if you enlarge the picture on FB - you can clearly see a bit of a shadow from a beard.

Wow, talk about butt ugly. Be happy they decided to adopt instead of make a habit of procreating. The guy must feel really stupid about now.

Was the manufacturer of the turkey baster also sued?

Awhile ago, I made a point of watching some episodes of the series, The L Word, to try and understand if I was truly and hopelessly out of touch with the women with I have nothing in common save gender. I am. On the show, there was a hapless Lesbian couple desperate to have a baby and they were ambushing every guy they knew to donate sperm for their progeny project, while making it clear that the guy would not any subsequent rights or responsibilities to the baby. They were doing this because they could not afford to keep purchasing semen from a sperm bank. They were openly astonished and outraged as one guy after another turned them down--especially the gay guys. The guys were clearly and rightfully uncomfortable with creating offspring in such an uncontrolled fashion.

#35, I was making a point to 10 that one´s orientation is not necessarily a choice for everyone just because it was for one person.

#23, I think you nailed this case regarding the one dingbat.

The point of this story seems to be that government can control all aspects of your life. Apparently, if they had gone through a licensed doctor and an accredited sperm bank (both government regulated and paid for), the man´s rights would have been protected. However, since they didn´t, the state went after him for child support and nullified the contract he made. Government owns you.

The article says the kid´s mother revealed the identity of the sperm donor because otherwise the state would not have provided medical insurance to the kid. As a former welfare worker I am puzzled as to why she didn´t lie about the identity as do so many others. They pick a common name and say they met the guy at a bar, got drunk, etc. and haven´t seen him since. Thus they hope to keep the real father sweet to provide some money under the table. But maybe she had already gone too far with the lesbian rights thing to do this. Still, it´s a pretty low payback for the "donation".

I think the guy gets exactly what he deserves. Any guy stupid enough to donate his sperm to a couple of Lesbian crazies deserves all the financial pain he can get for thinking he can become a parent without any responsibility. Especially when his DNA can be traced directly back to him. What an idiot.

They ran an ad on Craigslist three years ago looking for a sperm donor. The women split in 2010. All three had a contract. That is THREE. I did not sign the contract and therefore should not be paying for their lifestyle. I feel awful for all the children involved. Government - I just don´t think you thought this through.

Seems somebody should sue the state for allowing them to adopt eight children with no means to care for them or psych evals.

Lewis Grizzard was right-
Elvis Is Dead and I Don´t Feel So Good Myself

Barf alert.

#24--one of them now has a boyfriend. So there´s no accounting for taste!

There are so many things wrong with this.
1. They adopted children and then asked the state to pay.
2. They adopted way more children than just about anyone can appropriately raise unless they have the resolve of the Duggers.
3. They didn´t respect their marriage/civil union and got divorced. Marriage is for the purpose of staying together and raising the children.
4. They violated the concept of sperm donation by not leaving the donor as anonymous.