Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

  1. #21
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Justice Scalia says, on the other hand, to the effect that this isn't about applying an old law to new technology, this is about whether children who are born after the death of one parent are entitled to Social Security benefits.

    I'm on the fence and am interested in reading others opinions.

    Should these children (who were conceived after their father died) be entitled to benefits from their deceased father? What was the intent of the original benefit?

    If the husband died during the time the wife was pregnant I could see babies born through artificial insemination getting benefits.But not when she got inseminated after her husband died.It would be no different than if she tried to collect SS benifits for a child that was adopted after he husband died or benefits for step child.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  2. #22
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:42 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    What if it was not frozen sperm but frozen embryos?
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  3. #23
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    What does the Constitution say on this?
    I applaud your ability to cut quick to the issue with implementing unconstitutional laws on the federal level...they simply then proceed to create more and more issues that function outside of the constitutional groundwork of what the federal government of the united states is SUPPOSED to be doing. Bravo. You're absolutely right, Social Security doesn't have a direct link to a constitutional duty of government and as such various constitutional issues cascade down around it.

  4. #24
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I applaud your ability to cut quick to the issue with implementing unconstitutional laws on the federal level...they simply then proceed to create more and more issues that function outside of the constitutional groundwork of what the federal government of the united states is SUPPOSED to be doing. Bravo. You're absolutely right, Social Security doesn't have a direct link to a constitutional duty of government and as such various constitutional issues cascade down around it.
    I thanked him for posting, but he didn't take a position on the issue. No applause.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #25
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    What does the Constitution say on this?
    It says everyone on the planet deserved free money.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  6. #26
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Karen Capato used the frozen sperm of her deceased husband to conceive twins
    They're HIS children - of course yes. Holy ****!
    If she conceived - he was killed 2 days later - and 9 months later she had the babies they'd qualify.
    Wow - just wow.

    Now: if she was insiminated with *someone else's* sperm then no - doesn't it make sense that way?
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  7. #27
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,791

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    They're HIS children - of course yes. Holy ****!
    If she conceived - he was killed 2 days later - and 9 months later she had the babies they'd qualify.
    Wow - just wow.

    Now: if she was insiminated with *someone else's* sperm then no - doesn't it make sense that way?
    From the article :
    The Capato twins were born through using Robert Capato’s frozen sperm 18 months after he died of esophageal cancer
    In other words she deliberately got pregnant with his children AFTER he died then applied for benefits for the children (she had twins). Shes taking advantage of the system, the care and rearing should be up to her as the father had zero say in the event. If an estate were involved, they would be in no way entitled to anything. I would argue that this is trying to "grandfather" children into beneficiaries after the death for lack of a better term.

    Ill predict we will need a law to cover this situation because if it succeeds once, you can guarantee it will be tried over and over.

  8. #28
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,652
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    I agree with what others have said. The mother elected to be insemination long after her husband died, knowing that she would have to accept sole parenting and support responsibilities. Social security benefits for the children should be denied.

  9. #29
    Professor
    Billy the Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 02:29 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,449

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    You mean a document written in the 18th century by a slave owning, affluent, white, male minority is mute on a 21st century issue? I for one am absolutely shocked.
    Why are you shocked? Loose wire on the lamp cord?

  10. #30
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Justices ponder whether babies born through artificial insemination should . . .

    I think we need more facts here. Why did the father bank his sperm? Was it done with the intent that his wife would definitely have artificial insemination in the event that they couldn't have another child naturally? If so then I think the child should be entitled to the benefits. Why should it be any different than a case where the father died while the mother was already pregnant? What if the mother had gotten inseminated while the father was on his death bed? Basing the decision purely on the timing seems arbitrary.

    If, OTOH, there was no clear intent by the father to have the child, then I think the child shouldn't inherit. Imagine the precedent that would set. If a guy donates to sperm banks, is the government going to have to run around looking for his seedlings in order to split up his benefits 100 ways?
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •