Kansas will no longer change transgender people’s birth certificates to reflect their gender identities, the state health department said Friday, citing a new law that prevents the state from legally recognizing those identities.

The decision from the state Department of Health and Environment makes Kansas one of a handful of states that won’t change transgender people’s birth certificates. It already was among the few states that don’t change the gender marker on transgender people’s driver’s licenses.

Those decisions reverse policies that Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly’s administration set when she took office in 2019. They came in response to court filings by conservative Republican state Attorney General Kris Kobach to enforce the new state law. Enacted by the GOP-controlled Legislature over Kelly’s veto, it took effect July 1 and defines male and female based only on the sex assigned to a person at birth.

    • Kalash@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      A lot of laws are tied to people’s sex.

      Mandatory military service, retierment age or paternity leave to name a few.

      • n2burns@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are there?

        • I think all the sex-based US military laws have been reversed.

        • Retirement age shouldn’t be related to sex.

        • Paternity leave usually doesn’t relate to sex unless you’re talking about maternity leave, and that’s only for the person who gave birth and isn’t really related to what it says on a document.

        • SaltySalamander@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think all the sex-based US military laws have been reversed.

          Girls still do not have to register for the US draft. Boys, however, do.

        • Kalash@feddit.ch
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Sorry, I just used examples that first came to my head, but I’m not from the US. I assumed you would have some as well.

          And yes, a lot of them should be looked at and changed.

          • n2burns@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m also not from the US, but I can’t think of any laws/regulations that should be sex-based. Sex is often used as placeholder where a more specific term or definition would be more accurate. Sometimes, it should simply be replaced with the term gender, such as in discrimination and balanced hiring laws. Other times, such as in maternity leave, the option might be limited to AFAB, but there’s a more specific and accurate definition like, “a person who gave birth”.

    • gregorum@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is a useful form of a means of identification, but in that sense, insisting on identifying as birth sex over ones, represented gender identity, this forced representation makes no sense in that regard. Unless, of course, hate, bigotry, and cruelty are the point.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Is it actually a useful means of identification, though? What does anyone gain from knowing that Paul Blart is a boy?

        Sex is useful for doctors and stuff, but does anyone else need to know it so badly that it should be a vital document?