Friday, January 24, 2014
Sperm, Craigslist, Lesbians and Welfare: What Could Go Wrong?
There is so much wrong with the following story that like other great art that imitates life, I think I’ll let the story mostly speak for itself…and many of the ills of society in general.
So, stop me if you heard this one….
Two lesbians put up an ad on Craigslist looking for a sperm donor.
This is not in dispute.
They put up an ad on Craigslist looking for sperm, like sperm are a couch or a T.V. or those old worthless beanie babies your haggard aunt collected.
In response to the ad, one William Marotta, who apparently thinks of his sperm as a couch or a T.V. or those old worthless beanie babies his haggard aunt collected, was subsequently chosen as the "donor"-- a.k.a. the father in olden times parlance.
Marotta it turns out “donated” sperm three times, according to the birth mother, who subsequently “used a syringe to inseminate.”
These facts are not in dispute.
And do you know what?
A child was born. A daughter to be exact, although labeling her as a daughter is rather old fashioned of me.
Nevertheless, the child is a daughter whose parents are one William Marotta, willing victim and father, and Jennifer Schreiner, mother, lesbian, dupe and duper.
Turns out that there was a good reason for Schreiner and her partner, Mr. or Mrs. Schreiner, mother part deux, lesbian, dupe and duper, to use a free ad on Craigslist trolling for sperm donors and willing victims.
They did it because they're poor. They couldn't afford to pay the fees associated with artificial insemination through a doctor.
This is the part where Art takes over, the jerk.
When one is poor, one might not be able to afford a child either, which the last time I checked-- that is daily as the parent of a 16-year old-- is MUCH more expensive than artificial insemination.
So, Mrs. and Mr. Schreiner, like all good American these days, eventually applied for welfare benefits to take care of their daughter. It's only right that the Schreiners should lay off the financial duty of taking care of their daughter on you and me.
And the state, like all good Americans, asked: “What about the father?”
Oh no; like all good Americans, the state wasn’t concerned with his rights, or the psychological benefit a man might have in his “daughter’s” life.
The state was about the money.
When anyone applies for welfare benefits, both parents are examined for financial support, as is right.
Marotta and Schreiner both produced copies of contracts – albeit different versions—that acknowledged that one William Marotta, was indeed nothing more than a sperm donor and a willing victim and father.
Not good enough says the state, which doesn’t want to pay out welfare benefits for just anyone.
It seems the state's position is that the sperm was not procured through a medical doctor as is required by law. In order to be transubstantiated from the outdated father-mother model to the new, improved mother-mother model, the sperm donation, according to humanists, has to be touched by a doctor.
Fish meet bicycle.
Apparently the humanists at the Kansas state legislature believe that sperm must first pass through their highest of high priest’s hands, the “medical doctor,” in order for fatherhood-- that is confirmed by sperm’s DNA-- to be stripped from a man and transferred to a women pretending to be a man, pretending to be a woman, who can then be the father in the only two senses that matters to the welfare state—legally and financially.
“We stand by that contract,” says one of Marotta’s attorneys, Benoit Swinnen. “The insinuation is offensive, and we are responding vigorously to that. We stand by our story. There was no personal relationship whatsoever between my client and the mother, or the partner of the mother, or the child. Anything the state insinuates is vilifying my client, and I will address it.”
Too bad says the state, which wants Marotta to pay child support.
I’m relieved that there was “no personal relationship” with THAT women.
Oh wait, no I’m not.
Yes, I am. Oh, wait….
What a mess.
I don’t know anyone who might have any valid reasons to question the wisdom of homosexuality as a lifestyle, artificial insemination or gay marriage.
You know, besides overturning millennia of legal, ethical and moral thought on these subjects.
Only racists and homophobes would do that.
And those type of people are obviously the very people who are uncomfortable with Art imitating life.
Because it isn’t like Art has a daughter involved in this, right?
It's only a child, after all. And he was only the "donor".
Who now pays child support for a child he never wanted yet willingly fathered.
The liberal faith in the power of the legislature can't change the DNA evidence.
Good Job American Humanists!
Another grand creation.
Oh well. When you play God, as Mary Shelley taught us, you end up with a few Frankensteins. All you have to do now is kill the monster.