It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The lesbian couple could not have children. They wanted one and he agreed to give them one. The child belongs to the lesbian couple, not the sperm donor.
Originally posted by fallow the light
The child belongs to the lesbian couple, not the sperm donor.
The sperm donor would not have had the child if the lesbian couple would have never have asked for it.
Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by AQuestion
because with out them the mother would have no child and still have a failed relationship(and have to find another way to make money),perhaps she should have made a better choice then getting with a dead beat mom who would leave her to raise a child on her own and not consider the wishes of the child THEY(lesbian couple) chose to bring into the world why didnt they just adopt?or upon realizing that she could not care for the child why not keep its best interests in mind and put it up for adoption
im adopted and i hit the frigging lottery i went from 16 year old meth head prostitute (she tried to abort me her self with heroine and meth)because dead beat daddy a 46 year old illegal immigrant decided he could just go pluck another strawberry(person who whores them selves out for drugs).i went from that to head nurse of kaiser(mother) and the man who ran the most successful non profit in Californians history(father) so i think adoption might be good for the child as the mother is unable or unwilling to care for her own offspring and who knows perhaps the kid will get parents that actually care this time
Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
he explicitly said he wanted no part in raising the child and never said he would provide financially for it and the women accepted this by agreeing to raise the child.Why is it the mans fault for her marriage collapsing why should he face financial hardships for a child she brought into the world knowing it would not have financial support from the father?
Originally posted by fallow the light
reply to post by AQuestion
Now you are just playing off as crazy.
The couple COULD NOT have a child. Are you saying that adoption is slavery?
He agreed to give the 2 women a child since they could not have one. He would not have given them that child if he had to take responsibility for it. The child was not for him to raise, it was for the lesbian couple.
If the couple would not have wanted one and asked him, he would have never had a child.
Sounds to me that you just want to blame the man and will think of any ignorant statement to make it so.
Tell me, did the lesbian partner not have any responsibility for bringing the child into the world?
If the partner would have never agreed, then it would have never happened.
And if he had not been a sperm donor, child creator, then none of this would be an issue.
Sounds to me that you just want to blame the man and will think of any ignorant statement to make it so.
You said the was generous by giving them a person, how is that not slavery? You say he only did it because they asked him to, was he just following orders like the Nazis?
Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by AQuestion
well you sure seem to like speaking for me,like it or not abortion is legal so your just gonna have to make peace with that.i dont know what male hurt you in your life but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder that clouds your vision and gives you great anger id advise trying to find a way to deal with that before your anger consumes you.
as to the world being overpopulated im not one of those people that believes in agenda 42 or what ever that stuff is but we do have a good deal of people on our little blue rock but i don't think we need to start culling the heard as you seem to think of it....
i don't hold him accountable because it was a legal arrangement not him sleeping with her not him telling her baby your the only one for me and then disappearing as soon as she got fat or got distracted with another female he was a homosexual man who probably felt a loyalty to the lesbian couple as some kind of kindred spirits and assumed he could trust "his own kind"(hate phrasing it that way) and then got screwed over when the girls relationship failed and she didn't plan well enough for that eventuality
as to your participation comment i consider participation to be vaginal intercourse...baring that have him at least have stated an interest in raising the child the woman knew he didn't want to be a part of the child's life and is now trying to screw him over for money and greed even though she knew he was never intending to be in the child life financially why is she not liable for bringing a kid into the world SHE couldn't support(adoption remember?)
let me guess your one of those people that wants rape victims to have to raise the children of their rapists and that little girls should be forced to have the children of their molester uncle because some musty old book tells you abortion is wrong and a sin....if im wrong about the bible part i apologize but im thinking your just going for a walk before going back to sleep under your bridge for the night
Originally posted by fallow the light
reply to post by AQuestion
And if he had not been a sperm donor, child creator, then none of this would be an issue.
So I guess it's all his fault.....
...is swimming in a sea of ignorance, cannot seperate actual sperm donors from absent fathers, and isn't interested in rights.
And if he had not been a sperm donor, child creator, then none of this would be an issue.
LANCASTER, Ohio --- A Pickerington couple and their son are fighting for custody of a baby born to a Lancaster woman charged with having unlawful sex with the boy, who was 15 at the time of conception. A paternity test shows that the teen is the father of the baby born April 7 to Jane C. Crane, who was 19 when she became pregnant. Now, a judge has ordered him to pay $50 a month in child support and set visitation at seven hours a week.