Federal Judge Strikes Down DOMA

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Yet another federal judge has decided that his liberal opinion is more important that the democratic rule of the people, or even a law passed by Congress. Nevermind that marriage was culturally defined thousands of years ago as a man and wife with the presumption of children on the way if they're able. No Hollywood and liberal Democrats want marriage for gay relationships to make them feel better about themselves and by golly, they'll do anything to get it.

In a ruling today, Federal District Court Judge Joseph Tauro struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), ruling that DOMA discriminates against gays and lesbians and infringes on the rights of states to define marriage.

The ruling is available here.

The National Organization for Marriage released the following statement:


“A Boston judge has no moral right to decide the marriage question for the people of the U.S.”

– Brian Brown, President, National Organization for Marriage

WASHINGTON, DC – The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) released the following statements today in response to a federal judge in Boston ruling the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional.

“Under the guidance of Elena Kagan’s brief that she filed when she was Solicitor General, Obama’s justice department deliberately sabotaged this case,” charged Brian Brown, President of NOM, referring to the Justice Department’s brief which described DOMA as discriminatory. Despite the explicit language in DOMA that the law was designed to protect children’s right to their mothers and fathers, the judge disavowed that DOMA has anything to do with responsible procreation. “With only Obama to defend DOMA, this federal judge has taken the extraordinary step of overturning a law passed by huge bipartisan majorities and signed into law by Pres. Clinton in 1996. A single federal judge in Boston has no moral right to decide the definition of marriage for the people of the United States,” Brown continued.

"Does this federal judge want to start another culture war?” asked Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of NOM. “Does he really want another Roe. v. Wade? The simple fact is that the right of the federal government to define marriage for the purposes of its federal law and federal territories has been clear since the late 19th century, when Congress banned polygamy. Only an incompetent defense could have lost this case. We expect to win in a higher court.”


Post a Comment


Save the Constitution

Declaration of Liberty

In memory of our God, our Nation, our Religions, our Freedom, our Peace, our Families and our Fallen Dead;

WE THE PEOPLE declare that We will Never Yield to those who would place us in bondage. We will live for the Constitution and we will die for the Constitution, for we know that it was inspired of God for all of his Children.

Copyright © 2009-2010 Good Sense, All Rights Reserved.

Articles, quotes, comments, and images are the exclusive property of their respective authors, who own all rights to their use. Articles do not necessarily represent the views of Good Sense or its contributers. All copyrighted materials appearing on this site and not derived by contributing authors are protected by and used according to “Fair Use” as described in sections 107 through 118 of the U.S. Copyright Act (title 17, U. S. Code).