Thursday, August 13, 2015

Pam Bondi is Still a _______ (fill in your favorite Donald Trump misogynistic insult)

Really Pam?

From Equality Florida...
Florida’s Bureau of Vital Statistics is refusing to allow hospitals to list both same-sex parents on their baby’s birth certificate. The state has had almost a year to fix this problem ever since a federal judge declared the marriage ban unconstitutional.

Attorney General Pam Bondi could have avoided yet another costly lawsuit by directing all state agencies to simply follow the law. Instead she turned her back on repeated requests to take action and once again turned her back on LGBT Floridians.

Today, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Florida attorneys Elizabeth Schwartz and Mary Meeks filed a complaint on behalf of Equality Florida Institute and three plaintiff couples to demand that the Bureau update its policies and respect the marriages of same-sex couples.

Even now, AG Bondi could stop our suit with a phone call directing state agencies to comply with the law.

It's time for AG Bondi to stop defending discrimination in Florida: Sign the petition asking her to treat our families fairly and equally under the law!
And it's not just the gay issues. Pam is still out defending polluters and persecuting immigrants. What a tool.


Anonymous said...

Rational pro gay rights guy here...if a woman gets pregnant, can she list anybody she wants as father? If so, they should change it to read "parent" because it has zero biological meaning. But if the thing is supposed to reference biological father, tough muffins. Personally I think you are being selfish...why deprive you bouncing baby to know his or her biological background/ancestory? Until somebody comes up with the milkshake and pops our Danny and Arnold, don't matter what scotus has to say, the biological parents are who they are. Think you are over reacting on this one tough guy.

Godwhacker said...

If your wife has a child via a sperm donor who is the second parent? If you guessed you you're right. Now if you'd like to have an arrangement with the donor, maybe visitation rights or even a hot three way once the kid goes to sleep that's your prerogative. This is how things work for same sex families too. No more, no less.

Lamaritata v. Lucas, 823 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), rev. den., D.A.L. v. L.A.L., 835 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 2002), the biological parents of the child had entered into a written agreement specifying that the donor/father would have no parental rights or obligations if the mother became pregnant through artificial insemination. Nevertheless, after the mother gave birth to twins, the biological father filed a paternity action. He attempted to avoid his relinquishment of rights by arguing that he and the mother constituted a “commissioning couple” and, therefore, the statute did not operate to bar his rights as a parent. The opinion rejects this argument, finding that the parties had no relationship “that would fall under the rubric of ‘couple.’” They did not contract to raise the children together as a “mother and father,” as contemplated by the statutory definition of a commissioning couple.11

The opinion is also noteworthy for its broad rejection of the contractual arrangements between the parties. In three quotable sentences, the Second District made clear that such contracts will not be enforced:

• “A person who provides sperm for a woman to conceive a child by artificial insemination is not a parent.”

• “If the sperm donor has no parental rights, the sperm donor is a non-parent, a statutory stranger to the children.”

• “Even though the parties entered into subsequent stipulations, purportedly to give visitation rights to this non-parent, we conclude that agreement is not enforceable.”12

In support of these propositions, the opinion cites several cases holding that nonparents are not entitled to visitation rights. Included among those nonparents are individuals who had relationships to children as stepparents, “psychological parents,” and grandparents.13 The broad-based holding includes a reference to the Fifth District’s opinion in Taylor v. Kennedy, 649 So. 2d 270, 271-272 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), rev. den., Affourtit v. Taylor, 659 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 1995), for the proposition that “Florida courts do not recognize a claim for specific performance of a contract for visitation in favor of a nonparent.”14 Thus, even though Lamaritata and Lucas, as the biological parents of the child, had agreed to timesharing for Lucas, the appellate opinion utilized the severability clause in the contract to sever that portion as unenforceable.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I get all that. I agree that the biological "donor" is not the "parent", and I agree a donor should have no rights. But, the q I have is about birth certificates and what the purpose of the line for mother and father is. Is it biological or familial? Answer that twinkle toes and you just might win me over.

Godwhacker said...

Adopted parents get listed on the birth certificates so there is your answer.

Anonymous said...

It is very sad that Bondi is the AG of our state. What a joke.

Anonymous said...

TIL GW knows his shit!

Anonymous said...

Texas, yes, Texas of all places, just passed law that will list both parents (regardless of gender or biology) on the birth certificate.
Do we really want to say Texas is more progressive than we are?