Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
member. For example, in Dietz v. St. Edward’s Catholic Church (In re Bargfrede), 117 F.3d 1078, 1079 (8th Cir.1997), a husband used his assets to help pay his wife’s judgment debt to her church for embezzlement. The Eighth Circuit held that the husband’s claimed receipt of “benefits in the form of a release of a possible burden on the marital relationship and the preservation of the family relationship” were “indirect, non-economic benefits” to the husband that “do not constitute reasonably equivalent value.” Id. at 1080 (citations omitted). The court cited with approval cases holding that “moral obligations,” “love and affection,” and “spiritual fulfillment” are not reasonably equivalent value. Id. See also Walker v. Treadwell (In re Treadwell), 699 F.2d 1050, 1051 (11th Cir.1983) ; Zubrod v. Kelsey (In re Kelsey), 270 B.R.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that debtors receipt of love and affection from his two daughters in exchange for transfers of money was not reasonably equivalent value such love and affection is of no benefit to the creditors
B. holding that a remote tippee must know that original exchange was given in exchange for benefit
C. holding that the transfers at issue were not fraudulent transfers because  they did not diminish the debtors estate
D. holding that there is a difference between a debtor attempting to pursue an action for his own benefit and a trustee pursuing an action for the benefit of the creditors
E. holding that the receiver for a corporation had no standing to sue for inter alia receipt of funds fraudulently obtained fraud and unjust enrichment even though he was appointed on behalf of all the creditors because those were claims of the creditors not of the corporation
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.