Yeah, that's another wrinkle, and one I've often brought up as a reason why allowing same-sex marriages is less complicated than trying to ban them. But explaining how complicated things are currently got in the way of my explaining how simple things ought to be and can be.
But since it's been brought up:
To start with, if a couple marries and then one partner changes sex, the result is a legally-recognized -- at the Federal level, no less -- same-sex marriage. That kind of same-sex marriage we've had for a while now. I know two such couples and have heard of several more.
For folks with different timing than that though ... some states recognize SRS in different ways than other states. Some allow the birth certificate to be amended or replaced with a "corrected" one.
Some states look at the sex on one's driver's license to determine sex for the purpose of marriage, and others look at the birth certificate.
So we have cases where two men or two women can legally marry because the state doesn't recognize one's current sex. And we have cases were a man and a woman are forbidden to marry each other for the same reason. Which of these is "right" according to the opponents of same-sex marriage? It's all a-tangle. If you "fix" one, you "break" the other.
And then there's the couple who both had sex-changes, but one is from a state where they retroactively change the birth certificate and the other is from a state that doesn't, so legally they're the same sex even though they are currently opposite sexes and were born opposite sexes from each other. And they can't marry because their state does not recognize same-sex marriages. How the fuck does that situation "protect" anyone?
This makes things horrendously complicated now. But it doesn't make the issue of same-sex marriage complicated, because recognizing same-sex marriages means all the confusion becomes irrelevant. It would no longer matter (for the purpose of marriage) which way the state in which one was born or the state in which one wants to wed defines the legal sex of a transsexual, the confusing questions go out the window, and marriage for transsexuals becomes simple.
And then there's the couple who both had sex-changes, but one is from a state where they retroactively change the birth certificate and the other is from a state that doesn't, so legally they're the same sex even though they are currently opposite sexes and were born opposite sexes from each other.
That "plop" you heard was the sound of my brain exploding. :-)
I agree with you; government regulation of civil marriage complicates things way too much for no good end. Religions can do what they want, but the state owes equal protection to all.
Transsexual Marriage
But since it's been brought up:
To start with, if a couple marries and then one partner changes sex, the result is a legally-recognized -- at the Federal level, no less -- same-sex marriage. That kind of same-sex marriage we've had for a while now. I know two such couples and have heard of several more.
For folks with different timing than that though ... some states recognize SRS in different ways than other states. Some allow the birth certificate to be amended or replaced with a "corrected" one.
Some states look at the sex on one's driver's license to determine sex for the purpose of marriage, and others look at the birth certificate.
So we have cases where two men or two women can legally marry because the state doesn't recognize one's current sex. And we have cases were a man and a woman are forbidden to marry each other for the same reason. Which of these is "right" according to the opponents of same-sex marriage? It's all a-tangle. If you "fix" one, you "break" the other.
And then there's the couple who both had sex-changes, but one is from a state where they retroactively change the birth certificate and the other is from a state that doesn't, so legally they're the same sex even though they are currently opposite sexes and were born opposite sexes from each other. And they can't marry because their state does not recognize same-sex marriages. How the fuck does that situation "protect" anyone?
This makes things horrendously complicated now. But it doesn't make the issue of same-sex marriage complicated, because recognizing same-sex marriages means all the confusion becomes irrelevant. It would no longer matter (for the purpose of marriage) which way the state in which one was born or the state in which one wants to wed defines the legal sex of a transsexual, the confusing questions go out the window, and marriage for transsexuals becomes simple.
Re: Transsexual Marriage
That "plop" you heard was the sound of my brain exploding. :-)
I agree with you; government regulation of civil marriage complicates things way too much for no good end. Religions can do what they want, but the state owes equal protection to all.