I do NOT think that Ohio transgender (we don't use those object-free prefix "trans" here) or transsexual candidates getting knocked off the ballot for not revealing a name change of less than 5 years ago have a 14th Amendment case.
Tis true that the law has a marriage exception. But, by silence in MSM reporting, tis also apparently true that it does not have other exceptions. And the lack of these other exceptions would knock the pins out from under a 14th Amendment case.
The biggie is that, to reverse the marriage issue, it does not have a divorce exception.
Second is the question of the law's intent. It was passed in 1995, when issues over transsexualism were but a small blip on the country's political and social radar screen and transgenderism wasn't even that.
Third? Ignorance of a law is never an excuse. Sorry, Arienne Childrey and Vanessa Joy, but dem's da bees.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are appreciated, as is at least a modicum of politeness.
Comments are moderated, so yours may not appear immediately.
Due to various forms of spamming, comments with professional websites, not your personal website or blog, may be rejected.