![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumIn Florida there are legal ways for people of the same gender to marry... and the same legal quirk means that people of opposite genders, can't.
AP Story
It seems the 2nd District Court of Appeal (a Florida state court) has ruled that gender is unchangeable, so a woman who got a sex change was determined to have never married his wife (the marriage was voided, ab initio or, from the beginning, what the Church would call an annulment).
The flip side is, of course apparent, if one has had a sex change, and wants to marry someone of the same, exterior gender (since the court seems to think gentic, as opposed to phenotypic gender trumps all) it would be legal.
Court's Opinion
The language of the court is telling, because it accuses, by implication, that the man was being duplicitous, in "representing" himself as 1: a man and 2: the plaintiff's husband.
All this came out as part of a custody fight in the divorce (defendant had adopted a son, with whom plaintiff was pregnant at the time of the now dissolved marriage, as well as being the recognized father of a second child, conceived via artificial insemination, using defendant's brother as the sperm donor).
AP Story
It seems the 2nd District Court of Appeal (a Florida state court) has ruled that gender is unchangeable, so a woman who got a sex change was determined to have never married his wife (the marriage was voided, ab initio or, from the beginning, what the Church would call an annulment).
The flip side is, of course apparent, if one has had a sex change, and wants to marry someone of the same, exterior gender (since the court seems to think gentic, as opposed to phenotypic gender trumps all) it would be legal.
Court's Opinion
The language of the court is telling, because it accuses, by implication, that the man was being duplicitous, in "representing" himself as 1: a man and 2: the plaintiff's husband.
All this came out as part of a custody fight in the divorce (defendant had adopted a son, with whom plaintiff was pregnant at the time of the now dissolved marriage, as well as being the recognized father of a second child, conceived via artificial insemination, using defendant's brother as the sperm donor).
