Texas mom challenges transgender widow's marriage

[liblady]

Well this is some Grade A bull****



Judge Decides Transgender Widow's Marriage Was Illegal

i'm not so sure.....she did get married when she was still a man. i don't think it's necessarily right, but might be the correct legal decision.

 

[Your Star]

i'm not so sure.....she did get married when she was still a man. i don't think it's necessarily right, but might be the correct legal decision.

Her surgery does not mark when she legally became a female. She legally became a female when the state of Texas changed her records, and she wouldn't have been able to get married in the first place if her records did not state she was female.

 

[digsbe]

I don't think the transgendered widow is entitled to money legally. If SSM isn't legal in TX, and if chromosomes define gender (which in my opinion they do), then the marriage is void and the widow should not receive money under the law. If it's also true that the husband had no knowledge the the transgendered person's birth sex until after the marriage I think that also raises some red flags.

 

[Your Star]

I don't think the transgendered widow is entitled to money legally. If SSM isn't legal in TX, and if chromosomes define gender (which in my opinion they do), then the marriage is void and the widow should not receive money under the law. If it's also true that the husband had no knowledge the the transgendered person's birth sex until after the marriage I think that also raises some red flags.

Gender is defined by what gender the person identifies with, and the state of Texas recognized her as female. If the state recognized her as female, then why should her marriage be erased? And the husband did know about it, and helped her during her SRS surgery.

 

[digsbe]

Gender is defined by what gender the person identifies with, and the state of Texas recognized her as female. If the state recognized her as female, then why should her marriage be erased? And the husband did know about it, and helped her during her SRS surgery.

I disagree. I think gender is defined at birth and by genetics, not aesthetics. According to the linked article, in TX a marriage between a transgendered person and a someone who is not is only valid if the transgendered person is recognized as their surgically altered preferred gender prior to the marriage. It doesn't indicate that the transgendered wife had done this. There are also conflicting reports between the transgendered person and the family. The judge ruled that their marriage was void and according to the law (even though I disagree with it) I have to agree with the judge's ruling.

 

[CriticalThought]

I don't think the transgendered widow is entitled to money legally. If SSM isn't legal in TX, and if chromosomes define gender (which in my opinion they do), then the marriage is void and the widow should not receive money under the law. If it's also true that the husband had no knowledge the the transgendered person's birth sex until after the marriage I think that also raises some red flags.

If the state recognized her legally as a female, then it doesn't matter what her chromosomes are. She was legally married in the state and is legally entitled to what is hers. The judge is acting on his opinion not on state law.

 

[digsbe]

If the state recognized her legally as a female, then it doesn't matter what her chromosomes are. She was legally married in the state and is legally entitled to what is hers. The judge is acting on his opinion not on state law.

It seems though that he wasn't legally a female before the state of TX but merely had his birth certificate altered to reflect the transgender operation. Can you prove that the judge was acting upon his opinion?

 

[Your Star]

I disagree. I think gender is defined at birth and by genetics, not aesthetics. According to the linked article, in TX a marriage between a transgendered person and a someone who is not is only valid if the transgendered person is recognized as their surgically altered preferred gender prior to the marriage. It doesn't indicate that the transgendered wife had done this. There are also conflicting reports between the transgendered person and the family. The judge ruled that their marriage was void and according to the law (even though I disagree with it) I have to agree with the judge's ruling.

I believe gender is a mental state, one can be female, or male, no matter what they were born.
And the wife must have done this, because all her papers stated that she was female, and these papers were court ordered to change them from male to female. And I fail to see how she could get legally married in Texas if her papers stated that she was male, unless there's something about Texas we don't know about
I disagree vehemently with the judges ruling, the state of Texas declared her female, and it's wrong for them to go back on their previous stance.

 

[Your Star]

It seems though that he wasn't legally a female before the state of TX but merely had his birth certificate altered to reflect the transgender operation. Can you prove that the judge was acting upon his opinion?

Come on digs, don't be disrespectful with the pronouns like that. You're better than that.

 

[ecofarm]

Gender is imposed by society. If gender was an internal mental thing, there would be no such thing as transgender.

 

[digsbe]

Come on digs, don't be disrespectful with the pronouns like that. You're better than that.

I acted rudely and disrespected the widow and I need to apologize for that. I've been burned out lately and it's wrong that I take it out in the form of spite and disrespect towards a woman who has lost her husband. My speech was disrespectful and wrong and I must admit that.

If their marriage is indeed legal I support her receiving what is owed to her. However, I don't think the state should make it a special case and go against the law if their marriage was not legal. As it seems, the judge has ruled their marriage to be null and that's why she didn't receive things from her late husband.

 

[Your Star]

I acted rudely and disrespected the widow and I need to apologize for that. I've been burned out lately and it's wrong that I take it out in the form of spite and disrespect towards a woman who has lost her husband. My speech was disrespectful and wrong and I must admit that.

If their marriage is indeed legal I support her receiving what is owed to her. However, I don't think the state should make it a special case and go against the law if their marriage was not legal. As it seems, the judge has ruled their marriage to be null and that's why she didn't receive things from her late husband.

No worries digs, I know your a good guy, just pointing out a mistake

And I believe the marriage to be legal, as the state recognized her as a female, and issued the marriage licensee. It seems to me that they are treating her differently because she is trans.

 

[roguenuke]

No worries digs, I know your a good guy, just pointing out a mistake

And I believe the marriage to be legal, as the state recognized her as a female, and issued the marriage licensee. It seems to me that they are treating her differently because she is trans.

I see it as going back on their original decision to legally recognize her as a female just because they no longer wish to do so. This is bad. They originally recognized her as a "her" and now they want to say "no, you are a guy" because it looks like they might be supporting SSM.