WASHINGTON, D.C., July 14, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has slammed Massachusetts Judge Joseph Tauro's decision that a section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional.
In one of his two July 8 rulings, Justice Tauro said that because “irrational prejudice plainly never constitutes a legitimate government interest,” section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional.
“To claim that defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman is somehow irrational, prejudiced, or even bigoted, is a great disservice not only to truth but to the good of our nation,” responded Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' (USCCB) Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage.
“Marriage exists prior to the state and is not open to redefinition by the state. The role of the state, instead, is to respect and reinforce marriage.”
Section 3 of DOMA states that the term “marriage,” as used in any act of Congress or any ruling or regulation of the federal government, will mean only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.
Judge Tauro found this to violate the equal protection principles of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution in Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, and found it to violate the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Kurtz said that marriage is a “unique, irreplaceable institution” upon which “the very fabric of our society depends.”
He continued: “The state has a duty to employ the civil law to reinforce – and, indeed, to privilege uniquely – this vital institution of civil society. The reasons to support marriage by law are countless, not least to protect the unique place of husbands and wives, the indispensable role of fathers and mothers, and the rights of children, who are often the most vulnerable among us.”
“Thursday’s decision, by contrast, uses the power of the state to attack the perennial definition of marriage, reducing it merely to the union of any two consenting adults. But only a man and a woman are capable of entering into the unique, life-giving bond of marriage, with all of its specific responsibilities.”
The USCCB Office of the General Counsel also said that the two court rulings are mistaken on constitutional grounds.
Kurtz concluded: “Protecting marriage as only the union of one man and one woman is not merely a legitimate, but a vital government interest.”
The complete USCCB document may be found here.
See related stories on LifeSiteNews.com:
Federal Judge Rules Fed Gay 'Marriage' Ban Unconstitutional
https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jul/10070901.html