Home Videos Photos

A Judge Says A Gay Man's Kids Can't Be Alone With His Husband

| Filed under: Gay Gay GayLegal MattersSad Sad

Judge Gay Custody Husband Kids

This sucks!

Here's the short of the story: A man, William Flowers, had kids with his ex-wife, and tried to get custody past his visitation rights. He married his husband last year in Connecticut. The judge, Charley E. Prine Jr., says William can't leave his kids unattended with his husband.

Which is total bullshit.

“Because there was no allegation of abuse in the case, family law practitioners say the order is an unheard of infringement on the rights of parents and a judicial condemnation of the fact that the man, William Flowers, is not only gay but married to his partner, Jim Evans,” Berg wrote.

He wondered if the order was motivated by “utterly false” beliefs about gay people, saying, “Is it possible that Judge Prine believes that the children’s step-father or another gay man is more likely than a heterosexual to molest the kids or turn them into brainwashed zombie drag queens? Because the case is still pending and citing the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, Judge Prine declined to comment. But lawyers who practice family law in Houston (and requested anonymity) described the order as patently anti-gay.”

An Austin family law attorney, Jennifer Cochran, was willing to be quoted, and she concurred. She told Berg the order is “just not reasonable” and “strikes at the very heart of the fact that [Flowers is] gay … it’s judicial activism, legislating from the bench.

How can this happen? Why would this happen?

It's one thing to just rule that custody should remain the same with visitation rights, we get that, but there might be an emergency or situation where the children HAVE to be left with his husband during William's days with his kids.

It's just terrible that this went down this way.

Somehow, this needs corrected!

[Image via AP Images.]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Email this  »
10 Terribly Buzzworthy Mugshots!
Ferguson In Photos: 24 Hours After Grand Jury Decision In Michael Brown Case
MTV Reality Stars Who Died Too Soon
Celebrities Accused Of Sexual Misconduct!
Celebrities Who've Publicly Called Out Their Significant Others For Cheating!
The Top 10 Scariest Celebrity Stalker Stories!

25 comments to “A Judge Says A Gay Man's Kids Can't Be Alone With His Husband”



  1. 1

    I'm purdy sure the guys ex-wife had a hand in that decision.



  2. 2

    Most of this post is speculative propaganda from Mario. If a judge gave a ruling, he had a reason for it. It may be that the ex wife requested the provision; if so, she either has legitimate concerns or has issues she needs to resolve. Either way, it's premature (and immature) to jump to conclusions ala Perez. My own take? If there is no evidence of misconduct, then to include a prohibition is not appropriate. But to assume homophobia with zero evidence of it is as bad as Mario's indiscriminate and dishonest furthering of his pet agenda.



  3. 3

    A wise and reasonable decision from the Judge, looking out for the welfare of the children. Let us not forget that your words written say, "He married his husband last year"…that would actually state the the guy is the "Bitch" or submissive partner in this union and the fact remains if you read this the judge ruled that, " can't leave his kids unattended with his husband." Makes very good sense but then again anything that would infringe or be contrary to Mario's views is total bullshit.



  4. 4

    Re: La Garse
    You are a little late to the hate this week La Farce! You are wrong of course. You choose an anti Perez stance in all circumstances, without regard to any facts. You are sick and need to get some help for your obsession.



  5. 5

    What is the point of having "visitation rights" if you are just going to pawn your kids off on your current significant other? Isn't the entire point of you having your kids to see them? I very much doubt there would be an arrest given an emergency. If the father can't watch the kids, they should be returned to the mother - not given to the father's husband.



  6. 6

    Re: rickraton – I love how you claim La Garse is just wrong, but give nothing to defend your comment. You are as blind as perez is.



  7. 7

    The fact is we know next to nothing about this situation, but it doesn't seem that there is anything about this man's husband to suggest he cannot be around children. Like others have said, the ex wife could have had a hand in this, which, if she doesn't know this man very well she has every right to deny her children be alone with him, I've seen the same thing with men re-marrying other women. But above all on the side of the judge, I do not believe this is strictly a case of homophobia, too many people are too quick to throw that word around these days, but one of ignorance. Like I have said many times before, mentalities need to change the most.



  8. 8

    Thank God the judge is looking out for the children… seems no one else will.



  9. 9

    Re: PerezTheHypocrite – 100% agreed



  10. 10

    Do you notice how perez leaves out any information on the new husband other than he is gay. Does anyone know what his past is like or any misbehavior?. No , but because he is gay he should get the benefit of the doubt in perez's eye. Don't give the short of the story, give the whole story before you judge



  11. 11

    Good. Who knows what that damn butt pirate will do to those poor kids.

  12. yeez says – reply to this


    12

    Re: La Garse – I agree. This is fairly standard in a lot of custody arrangements with heterosexual couples. The significant other is usually not allowed to be alone with the kids. I know in some states parenting classes are even mandated for partners. This has absolutely nothing to do with being gay, because the same things happens to straight parents all the time.



  13. 13

    Who really cares? The judge's ruling will never ever hold up and it will get overturned. If the judge did anything here - he just made it look even WORSE to be ignorant toward equal rights.



  14. 14

    so, a woman cannot leave her daughter with his husband, and a man cannot leave his son with his wife? thats fucked up



  15. 15

    Re: PerezTheHypocrite – So what you're saying is that if the situation was a male and female that were married, the stepparent should always be there? What if both biological parents are at work? — you think that the stepparent should not be allowed to care for the children and instead they should be sent to daycare or someone not related to them for care?? There are plenty of reasons why a parent cannot be with their kids 100% of the time and in cases when the parents are not together, they still have to rely on others to care for the children at times, it doesn't mean they don't want to spend time with them!



  16. 16

    Obviously, we don't know the whole story here, or WHY the judge made the ruling they did, but IF the ruling was based only on the fact that the couple was gay, then it was TOTALLY wrong. If the man wasn't gay, and remarried a woman, you would never hear of a judge ruling that the kids couldn't be left alone w/their stepmother. (Unless there was some sort of history of abuse or something.)



  17. 17

    A good decision by the judge. Odds are the gays are also pedophiles.



  18. 18

    Many of you are simply ignorant. I have known the stepfather in this case for over 10 years. He is also a father and a wonderful one. There were no allegations of abuse, negligence or any bad behavior in the trial that led to this ridiculous decision.

    The judge actually has revised the decision to say that this children can not be left with any other adults–male or female. So now they cannot attend birthday parties, Sunday School, play dates, etc. Their mother has no such restrictions, so I guess she is free to drop them off wherever and whenever she wants.



  19. 19

    Can I just say that if this man did have an intimate relationship with a woman for a long period of time, which is presumed because they have a child together, he is not gay! He is bisexual or pansexual but he's not just gay. The hatred I have for gay people who have this idea that it's you're either gay or straight is immense.



  20. 20

    Kudos to the judge for making the right decision!



  21. 21

    Im sure theres more to this story than you are telling us….



  22. 22

    Oh to add another thing for the dope that said about why would william have to leave the kids with Jim …..let see your not a parent then and if your not then how r u to judge about a parent issue. If u are a parent then tell me….and yes I posted my number. You never had to have ur wife/ husband to watch the kids so u can run to the store to get something u forgot for dinner…..or go get medicine from the store because one your childern is sick. If ur a true parent then u would know reason Jim will have to watch the childern…..is called aback plan…..God I hate stupid people



  23. 23

    First let me say that William is my brother. The comments on whether or not they are pedophiles is way off base. Second, let me tell you that William is no "Bitch' and could probably kick most guys ass. The bottom line is that you homophobes are just plain uneducated. By the way, two men being married would make both of them "Husbands".

    Also, to suggest deviance, or the propensity there of, because they are gay is opening up a whole new can of worms. Williams husband, is a licensed attorney and any reason that would suggest his character is any less than superb would lead to questioning his standing with the Texas Bar Association, which it has not. Therefore, since the Bar doesn't seem to think that being gay is reason enough to evidence low morals or propensity to pedophilia, the judge has no reason to either. This is purely Texas, Republican activism.

    I love ya bro and Give 'em Hell.



  24. 24

    I am William's attorney. What most people, including the reporters, don't realize is that the jury, when interviewed following the hearing, wanted was for the kids to go with Dad. They only left them with Mom because they had attended school and extracurricular activities in her neighborhood for several years and they didn't want to disrupt that. William is a fine man. He loves his kids, and his kids love him. They are normal kids who couldn't care less if their father was married to a man or a woman. Who William chooses to love and share his life with has no negative effect on these kids. It is extremely disturbing that people think homosexuals have some propensity to abuse children. The opposite is actually true. More importantly than anything else, there was absolutely NO allegations of abuse, inappropriate behavior, etc. In fact, there was NO evidence that these men even kiss in front of the kids. Judge Prine is a good man and a conscientious Judge, but this time he got it wrong. I won't speculate as to why, I just know he made a big mistake. Lastly, I am a straight woman with four kids. I would be happy to leave any of them in the care of William or Jim. They are good people.



  25. 25

    I know Jim very well. I see him almost every week. He is a father of two. I have met his children and they are great kids. Jim is intelligent, loving, kind, and generous. I'm a straight woman with 10 grandchildren and I would trust Jim to watch any of my grandchildren. I'm not naive. I know an ex-priest gay child molester who should be locked-up. I also know a couple of VERY STRAIGHT child molesters who should also be locked up! So there! Gay does not make you a child molester. Love you, Jim.