[Nevermore]

Camilla B. Taylor, an attorney with Lambda Legal, argued that birth certificates had to do with social, rather than biological, reality. "The purpose of spousal presumption of legitimacy--and Iowa’s birth certificate which reflects the presumption--has always been to protect children from the historic stigma of what was termed ‘illegitimacy’ or ‘bastardy,'" she said.

Silly me, I always thought it was a "health" issue.
And now I'm kinda curious, given the Orwellian logic: does the "mother" on the certificate really have to be the mother, or could the mother be the "father"? Maybe that doesn't matter, either, given that it is a "social" document.

[sodpoodle]

***...protect children from the historic stigma of what was termed ‘illegitimacy’ or ‘bastardy,’” she said.***

That much is true; so we have to understand ‘what is the present-day legal reason to register births?’

Citizenship? DNA? Obtaining SS number? Census?

Expect that new data will include:
Sperm donor? Biological and Custodial parent or parent? Marital status of custodial parents? Sex of each custodial or biological parent?

[kabumpo]

This is one of the reasons taht I’m against this whole gay-marriage thing. It leads, immediately, to lying about reality and changing, permanently, the very definition of WORDS. It is inherently satantic.