You know you’re in Kansas when a judge rules a sperm donor owes child support

A man who provided sperm to a lesbian couple in response to an online ad is the father of a child born to one of the women and must pay child support, a Kansas judge ruled Wednesday.

Topeka resident William Marotta had argued that he had waived his parental rights and didn’t intend to be a father. Shawnee County District Court Judge Mary Mattivi rejected that claim, saying the parties didn’t involve a licensed physician in the artificial insemination process and thus Marotta didn’t qualify as a sperm donor…

Anyone think the parents being a same-sex couple had nothing to do with the judge’s decision?

The Kansas Department for Children and Families filed the case in October 2012 seeking to have Marotta declared the father of a child born to Jennifer Schreiner in 2009. The state was seeking to have Marotta declared the child’s father so he can be held responsible for about $6,000 in public assistance the state provided, as well as future child support.

Marotta opposed that action, saying he had contacted Schreiner and her partner at the time, Angela Bauer, in response to an ad they placed on Craigslist seeking a sperm donor. He said he signed a contract waiving his parental rights and responsibilities…

We stand by that contract,” Marotta’s attorney Benoit Swinnen said. “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…”

The state of Kansas and what passes for a welfare department have found themselves a piece of Kansas legislation to use as a copout on providing care and concern they normally would provide to families that fit their biblical definition of marriage. That’s why they’re using it. That’s why a judge provides her own expert sophistry.

Be careful driving out of state when you’re heading home. You might fall off the edge of the Earth.

Independent review says NSA program is illegal and should end

An independent executive branch board has concluded that the National Security Agency’s long-running program to collect billions of Americans’ phone records is illegal and should end.

In a strongly worded report to be issued today, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board said that the statute upon which the program was based, Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act, “does not provide an adequate basis to support this program…”

The board’s conclusion goes further than President Obama…The board had shared its conclusions with Obama in the days leading up to his speech…

The divided panel also concluded that the program raises serious threats to civil liberties, has shown limited value in countering terrorism and is not sustainable from a policy perspective.

“We have not identified a single instance involving a threat to the United States in which the telephone records program made a concrete difference in the outcome of a counterterrorism investigation,” said the report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post. “Moreover, we are aware of no instance in which the program directly contributed to the discovery of a previously unknown terrorist plot or the disruption of a terrorist attack.”

The politicians and pundits who say otherwise are liars, egregious and gutless, fools dedicated to Cold War ideology.

RTFA for beaucoup details, analysis – albeit as stodgy as expected.

From Obama to Mike Rogers, the conformity of cowards who prefer Overlords to oversight, continues as freely under John Brennan as it did in the CIA under Allen Dulles. From liberals to anal retentive conservatives, allegiance to anything-but-liberty is their only solution to the fear ruling their political lives as thoroughly as their dedication to corporate wealth.

Pic of the Day


Click to enlarge

A worker clearing away the snow-covered sidewalk at the Apple 5th Avenue store in NYC apparently rammed into one of the structural tempered-glass panels that is the store facade. The tempered structure worked as intended and it didn’t collapse after shattering.

It’s been at least a dozen years since I worked on a project using structural architectural glass. A piece this size – special order from PPG – would have cost close to $100K BITD.

I wonder which insurance company will be suing some other insurance company over this?