'Transgender marriage' up next?
Experts say even the U.S., embroiled in its own battle over same-sex marriage, could be affected by the ruling.
The case, Joanne Cassar vs. Malta, centers on a “transgender” person – a man who underwent surgery in 2005 to resemble a woman – seeking government recognition and sanction of a “marriage” to another man.
Following appeals, the deeply Catholic island nation in the Mediterranean Sea eventually refused to grant the plaintiff permission to marry a male partner.
For Cassar, however, the decision was unacceptable. Last summer, Cassar sued the government of Malta with the ECHR, claiming that a “right to marriage” outlined in the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
The European rights court in Strasbourg, which ruled in the landmark 2002 Goodwin vs. United Kingdom judgment that marriage could not be based on biological sex, eventually agreed to hear the case. The outcome, however, is far from certain.
Malta’s constitutional court clearly acknowledged the decade-old marriage ruling by the ECHR, which stated that the European court was “not persuaded that at the date of this case it can still be assumed that these terms [man and woman] must refer to a determination of gender by purely biological criteria.”
However, Malta’s high court refused to apply the ECHR ruling in the Cassar case, arguing that the nation was not bound by the European decision, because the ruling was “social engineering” based on dubious notions of evolving societal norms, not law.
Read More: http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/transgender-marriage-up...

















http://www.metnews.com/articl...
If you are out, why do you want to change your birth certificate?
Plus, it'd be kind of weird to undergo extensive surgery and name changes only to have my sex read "female" on my birth certificate.
I don't think it is weird that I underwent genital re-assignment surgery, and now have a vagina, clitoris, vulva, etc., and still have male on my birth certificate. That doesn't make me any less female than any other woman. I am legally female under both Illinois and federal law. My gender marker is F on my driver's license, and the Social Security Administration has me listed as female. There is a need to change current identification forms, etc., but why the historical birth certificate?
I guess we are just different. Having my birth certificate changed would make me feel liberated, in a sense. Like being born a girl never happened and was a horrible nightmare. I'm sure you already know the feelings I'm describing since you attempted to live as a male. However, we are two separate entities and handle our feelings differently. I respect your perspective and opinion, but I don't feel it pertains to my situation.
Again, I am only "stealth" to those who don't know me very well. As it should be. My primary objective is to be viewed as male in society, not transgender. Therefore, I won't run into random strangers and admit I'm transgender. I prefer to blend in a bit.
Kansas
Administrative Code: K.A.R. § 28-17-20 (b)(1)(A)(i) (2006).
Text: (i) The items recording the registrant's sex may be amended if the amendment is substantiated with the applicant's affidavit that the sex was incorrectly recorded or with a medical certificate substantiating that a physiological or anatomical change occurred.
Notes: Amended certificates will be marked "Amended," though the amended sections will not be specified.
Summary: Kansas will issue a birth certificate reflecting the proper sex.
I'm not quite sure if merely having top surgery would constitute an amended certificate, or if one would have to undergo bottom surgery as well.
I honestly would be satisfied with top surgery and hormones the rest of my life.