Law Professor Ann Althouse satisfies with more of her typically provocative commentary. Apparently Wisconsin granted a marriage license to a transsexual woman (born as a man) and another woman, after an initial bout of confusion:
Because the state prohibits same-sex marriages, Terry and Winstanley’s bid for a quick Milwaukee County Courthouse wedding last week was derailed until a hearing could be convened to investigate, even though County Clerk Mark Ryan accepted their marriage-license application as valid. “They came in and applied just like anyone else would,” said Ryan, who accepted the application after the couple paid the regular $100 fee and swore they were eligible to marry under state law. Ryan said that Terry was able to produce a birth certificate listing the name Ronald and
the gender as male. However, staff in his office thought the couple appeared to be two women – and noticed that Terry had to start over in filling out the form. On the first try, Terry had written “Barbara Lynn Terry” where the form says “Bride.”
There are other facts: Terry is a felon and former rapist and had previously been denied transfer to a women’s prison. Apparently several state courts had held that it’s the sex on the birth certificate that determines your elibility to get married in states where marriage is for heterosexuals-only.
The kicker, as Althouse notes, is that Transsexuals would have been all to happy for this marriage to have been denied. Denying the marriage would have meant that Terry’s sex-change changed her status under the law, divesting her of her male birth sex (Ronald) and changing her (I’m equivocal about what term to use myself) into a female post-operative (Terry).
Right you are, Ann.
As titillating to me is the recent bill in Washington State which would dissolve the marriages of couples that remain childless three years after marrying. After all, if homosexual couples violate morality on grounds that “marriage is between a man and a women for the purpose of raising children,” then if heterosexual themselves can’t bear fruit — well, you get the picture.
Likely far more successful, given the shifting popular views on homosexuality, will be the current trend of activists to abandon the fight to legalize “marriage,” and focus instead on lobbying for equal protections for committed homosexual couples. Despite the bill cited above, both Washington state and Rhode Island are at the forefront of this movement. Intriged to see the results and what the public is willing to accept.