Extracts from Letters Written on Behalf of the Universal House of Justice on Transsexuality, 2002
[1] The House of Justice has not found any text in the Bahá’í writings which deals explicitly with the subjects of transsexuality or surgical operations carried out to change sex or to establish a single sex. It has decided that changes of sex or attempts to change sex should, at the present time, be considered medical questions on which advice and guidance should be sought from experts in that field.
If a Bahá’í has had surgery and a change of sex has been registered officially on the birth certificate or otherwise, marriage is permissible to a person of the sex opposite to that which is officially registered. (31 August 1983 to an individual believer)
********
[2] On the specific question of changing one’s sex, the House of Justice has not found any text; its view is that this subject is primarily a medical question and as such requires advice and guidance from experts in that field.... It is not within the province of the Assembly to advise Mr. ... whether or not to undergo a sex-change procedure, but it does have the right to request him to provide it with documentary evidence, both medical and civil, stating what his/her sex is. In other words, until it receives proof that he has become female, it must go on the premise that he is male and his moral behaviour must be governed by Bahá’í principles on that basis. Once it is certified that his sex has been changed, he would need to observe Bahá’í moral principles as they apply to a woman, and the community would, presumably, be informed of the change. In other words, undergoing the procedure is a medical matter and the Assembly is concerned only with the change of status which it would produce. The Local Spiritual Assembly also expresses concern about his current behaviour which gives the impression of homosexuality, and thus places in question the morality of his having roommates of either sex, no matter what stage the sex-change procedure has reached. An example is his dressing as a woman while still, apparently, being a man. Such actions could well be regarded as giving the appearance of immoral behaviour and as having the potential for bringing the community into disrepute. As you are well aware, if a believer’s conduct conspicuously disgraces the Faith and brings serious injury to its reputation, his voting rights are subject to deprivation; generally such an action should be taken only after the person has been counselled and warned of the possible consequences of his behaviour. (27 December 1987 to a National Spiritual Assembly) [footnote: The National Spiritual Assembly sought guidance on behalf of a Local Spiritual Assembly.]