Should marriage licenses have a requirement to disclose gender reassignment by either party?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Lamia

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

One law prevents transsexuals from marrying members of their original gender as a consequence of the fact that it prevents same-sex marriage.

The other, hypothetical law ostensibly prevents transsexuals from deceiving people into marrying them.

Not at all the same thing (not that I agree with the first law, or would agree with the second assuming the first didn’t exist).

They’re not the same law, but in a state where the first law is on the books and a transsexual person cannot legally change their sex then the second law is redundant. It’s just saying one isn’t allowed to do something one is not legally permitted to do anyway. The only thing I can see that the second law actually does that wouldn’t be covered by the first law is that it would allow additional legal charges to be brought against transsexuals – and transsexuals alone – if they attempted to enter into an invalid marriage.

Eh?

We’re not talking about a criminal law here. We’re talking about a civil provision that specifies that a marriage in which a transgendered person deceives his or her spouse is invalid.

You don’t get in trouble for marrying someone you’re not allowed to marry (unless it’s a minor, or something, and even then you’d probably only be charged with crimes relating to unlawful sexual conduct). You just don’t have a valid marriage.

The law would be for the purpose of preventing deceitful transgendered spouses from collecting death benefits, or alimony, or whatever, not to put them in choky.

@scifisam2009

Are transgendered people who are still legally (in that state) their birth gender prevented from marrying at all? If the trans woman in the OP had fallen in love with a CIS (female on birth certificate, basically) woman, would she have been barred from marrying her too?

No. They are never legally considered to have changed gender, so there’s nothing keeping them from marrying their original opposite genders.

[Lamia]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

We’re not talking about a criminal law here. We’re talking about a civil provision that specifies that a marriage in which a transgendered person deceives his or her spouse is invalid.

Well then, we’re back to my previous question of why such a provision is necessary when the marriage would be invalid even if the transgendered person HADN’T deceived his or her spouse. If the marriage is invalid regardless of what the spouse knows, such a provision serves no purpose aside from creating additional hassle for transsexuals.

Would you care to actually address my argument here, or are you just going to dodge it again? I’ve written at considerable length now on why this sort of law would be a bad idea, both in states where transsexuals may legally marry people of their same birth sex and in states where they cannot. I understand that you’re not actually in favor of this hypothetical law, but if you’re trying to play Devil’s Advocate then you’re not doing a very good job. If you’re just trying to waste my time then I’m afraid I’ve let you do all too good of a job.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Actually, that’s a pretty good point. I suppose I have been wasting your time. :o

[leander]

@scifisam2009

Are transgendered people who are still legally (in that state) their birth gender prevented from marrying at all? If the trans woman in the OP had fallen in love with a CIS (female on birth certificate, basically) woman, would she have been barred from marrying her too?

As an interesting aside, the ruling has been used to that very effect in several instances, including:

In April, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott’s office was asked to give a legal opinion in a separate case on an issue connected to the 1999 ruling.

El Paso County Attorney Jo Anne Bernal asked for an opinion on whether the county clerk’s office could issue a marriage license to two West Texas women if one of the women, who had previously undergone a sex change, presented a birth certificate that identified her as being born a man.

The West Texas couple didn’t wait and went to San Antonio, where Bexar County officials granted them a marriage license, saying they relied on the 1999 ruling. Bexar County has previously issued marriage licenses in similar situations.

Abbott’s office has yet to issue an opinion.

[Malacandra]

@Inner_Stickler

@Malacandra

Relationships should be based on openness, honesty and trust. Unless of course I decide to be un-open, dishonest and mistrustful, in which case I get to say it was someone else’s fault, and if she had somehow hid it from him, it speaks to her willingness to tell lies in order to marry a bigot. Goddamn.

Damn those wily transexuals and their bids to capture unaware straights. Why will no one help them?

Well, for all I know different, 99.99% of transfolk are ethical and honest, possibly more so than cisfolk, pound for pound. But in this instance we seemed to be considering the instance of the hypothetical 0.01% of transwomen who suspect, with justification, that they’re dealing with a bigot but want to marry him anyway for some poorly-explained reason; and it’s that subset of TGIs whose rights we’re addressing. Y’all want to suppose that I’m hastily generalising to all MTFs, I guess nothing I say will dissuade you.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Is anyone who doesn’t want to marry a transexual automatically a bigot?