So, as generally predicted, the High Court case of transsexual marriage was turned down. W could not be a legal bride, though "she" has obtained the female status in her HKID card.
Opponents of the court ruling argued that the judge has been too conservative, and has omitted the changing tide of the social norm. However, a judge should stick to legal principle while writing judgment. That is, if ordinance exists, follows. If there is no ordinance at all, see the common law precedents. So, even if the ordinance is obsolete, judge should still apply it. The responsibility of keeping ordinance up-to-date should be on legislators' shoulders, not judges.
One of the newspapers made an interesting comparison. There is a transsexual, called Joanne. "She" is a male-turn-female. However, Joanne loves women. Thus, according to the prevailing law, Joanne could marry another lady, legally and openly, as the gender on her birth certificate is "M".
Ridiculous, right? Nevertheless, I don't see the law would change in the near future. Our legislators are either too timid to predict the reaction of the 9/10 heterosexuals, or too retard to acknowledge equal rights. Status quo is always nice.
沒有留言:
張貼留言