The document will be factually incorrect, and therefore useless. Doesn't the judge care about that at all? Does he not understand the purpose of such documents is to assemble information based on facts, not on 'feelings'? It's not a birth announcement, for cryin' out loud...it's for record keeping purposes. Or at least they used to be.
Yes, those are rhetorical questions. It's obvious the judge was bitten by a rabid moonbat long ago and has the venom coursing through his bloodstream.
This is another reason to scorn the Slimy Sucker Seven for their 'compromise'. They are perpetuating exactly this type of idiocy.
Well, if you're worried about being factually correct, that was lost years and years ago. It's the law in a good many states that the husband of the mother's name automatically goes on the birth certificate, regardless of biological parentage. Easy way to become a parent without the hassles of adoption is for a man to marry a woman who's carrying a child out of wedlock.