Gay Dad Ordered To Stay In Closet

[Queersetti]

Gay Dad Ordered
To Stay in the Closet

New York Lawyer
January 9, 2004

By The Associated Press

NASHVILLE -- A state appeals court says a gay father must keep his homosexuality in the closet when his son is around.

But the state Court of Appeals says it was wrong for a lower court to send Joseph Randolph Hogue to jail for simply telling the boy he was gay.

As part of a divorce hearing, Hogue was barred from "exposing the child to his gay lovers and, or his gay lifestyle."

Hogue claimed it was an illegal and overly broad restraining order.

The appeals court says it found nothing wrong with the lower court shielding the child from the gay influences.

But the court did agree with Hogue that the order didn't specifically ban the father from telling his son about his sexual orientation.

 

[69forever]

I had to stop and think about this...before making a knee-jerk response. As it is I would like more information, but in general terms, these are my thoughts about it.

Nobody should be compelled to hide who they are from anyone they know, much less loved ones and family. That being said...it is not reality in this puritanically homophobic culture.

Too me, it would seem the Court was out of bounds to restrict the Father from revealing his sexual orientation. At the same time, I would hope that the man had the sense to not flagerently expose his son to sexual situations when he had visitation rights.

Divorces are traumatic enough on children in hetro relationships.
Add to the mix a presumably straight woman who has lost her relationship to another man...and hell hath no fury...the problem in the whole deal is what it does to the child.

I have difinitive opinions about it politically and socially...but on the personal level...the childs welfare is paramount. From past experience.

 

[SweetCherry]

When my sister's husband divorced his first wife, it was part of the divorce settlement that he couldn't expose his children to my sister (they were dating already by this time, since he'd been seperated from his first wide for a while) for a period of like 6 months or a year. I can't quite remember which. I can kind of understand that, as a way to avoid bringing someone into a child's life who's not going to hang around. But, I don't think he should have to hide any future long term partner he might have from his child. That's just plain wrong.

 

[Etoile]

Oh yeesh. So what, the dad's supposed to pretend he's asexual around his son? What about questions about mom? I wonder how old the son is. There's a more complete version of the AP story at http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0104/09gaydad.html but it still doesn't mention the kid's age.

 

[69forever]

Oh yeesh. So what, the dad's supposed to pretend he's asexual around his son? What about questions about mom? I wonder how old the son is. There's a more complete version of the AP story at http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0104/09gaydad.html but it still doesn't mention the kid's age.

He didn't, nor should he have to, pretend he is asexual around his son. There is not enough information to go past saying that the lower court's ruling, banning him from revealing he was gay was wrong. A spiteful ex-wife will make your life a living hell.
From experience. And mine was leaving her for another woman.

 

[ExistentialLuv]

Sounds like another ACLU case to me.



I lived in Tennessee right at the heart of the Smokie Mountains. I did stay in the closet there. They are very bias, hypocritcal, ignorant, corrupt, and much more.

Damn bible belt country.

 

[Adrenaline]

As part of a divorce hearing, Hogue was barred from "exposing the child to his gay lovers and, or his gay lifestyle."

I have a problem with this quote. If the father were straight I sincerely doubt that a part of the divorce hearing would be having him barred from "exposing his child to his straight lovers, or his straight lifestyle".

IMO, in order for you to get to that point you have to be coming from the premise that there is something awful about homosexuality that children must be protected from.

Naturally one wouldn't want any child to be prematurely exposed to any sort of overtly sexual situation, but is this usually brought up in divorce proceedings? I'm not gay but I find it hard to believe that the "gay lifestyle" is all about sex.

 

[Etoile]

You're quite right, adrenaline. It's also about politics, partnership, and a sense of community!

I'm still wondering how old the child is. Maybe he's 15 and is already aware of human sexuality, in which case this would be even more absurd. Or maybe he's 3 and isn't old enough to care, making him the prime age for learning about tolerance.

 

[innocentone]

TCH....*rolling eyes* If I didnt know better that not all christians are assholes....Id say it was time for a bible-ectomy on the ex-wife and the moronic judge..

 

[deezire1900]

not all Christians.

 

[Zergplex]

Zergplex Speaks

TCH....*rolling eyes* If I didnt know better that not all christians are assholes....Id say it was time for a bible-ectomy on the ex-wife and the moronic judge..

Not all christians are assholes..... but I think a bible-ectomy would be a great idea! Some people just take obscure sections of the bible to ridiculous lengths, like the sections they quote against homosexuals. My 2 cents.

-Zergplex

 

[Bitchslapper]

I thought I commented on this already? Anyway, I agree with the consensus here. It's ridiculous to expect something like that. If you're going to claim that the father can't have his partners around the child, then why not expect the same of single parents who are straight?

Anyway, as far as I know, the parts of the Bible that refer to homosexuality at all (and when they do most of them are vague) are in the Old Testament, which IMO shouldn't even be in the Bible because Jesus is in the New Testament only. Am I the only one who thinks it's called Christianity for a very good, logical reason?

 

[Adrenaline]

Anyway, as far as I know, the parts of the Bible that refer to homosexuality at all (and when they do most of them are vague) are in the Old Testament, which IMO shouldn't even be in the Bible because Jesus is in the New Testament only. Am I the only one who thinks it's called Christianity for a very good, logical reason?

No, it's mentioned in the New Testament as well but I haven't been to Sunday School for quite some time so damned if I can remember which book.

Also Christianity's roots, history and many of its values are in the Old Testament so I don't think that it's completely irrelevant.

 

[Cletus82]

Both parents sound like selfish A-holes.

If this is a young kid we're dealing with then his fathers sexual orientation should be of no matter to the kid. Meaning his father should make no attempt in making him understand. They should let this kid just be a kid.

Whether or not anyone wants to beleive it or not (frankly I don't give an eff), a situation such as school event where parents are invited will totally make this kid uncomfortable, and embarrsed (kids are very mean to each other, especially young ones).

Now I am in no way shape or form saying it is wrong for this kid to be around his fathers partener, it could be a good thing.

However, this kid may be a teenager. If so the choice should really be up to the kid. He may also be angry and may feel like his father has been lying to him all these years by staying with his mother.

What it really gets down to is neither you or I or anyone on here really know what the situation is. Every one of these types of situations usally tend to be totally opposite from the other.

I just hope nothing bad happpens to this kid on account of his mothers bitter feelings and will to make his fathers life more difficult than it already is at this present time, or on account of his fathers decision to instantaniously (at least through the mother and childs eyes) change his life style and orientation and expect everyone to understand and accept him.

Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with being gay I have many gay/lesbian friends, but I dont have to accept/understand them, I choose to.

p.s.- Try this one on for size....... When I was younger I had a gay relative, by the age of ohhhh I'd say 10, I knew he was gay. Not because anyone told or tried to make me understand "tolerance". I found out he was gay becuase I put the pieces together myself and made my own decision about this person and his character. It is just as wrong to make this kid understand homosexuality just as much as it is to shelter him from it, whether or not people wil ever understand that very simple yet somehow apparently very complex fact.

BOOYAH!!

 

[arljjc]

Two of our best friends are a gay couple who live across the street form me an my wife. One was married and had two children before coming out. The ex-wife and mother of the children was and is a basket case, not because of the divorce or him being gay.

Anyway, long story short they raised the daughter since she was 11 and she is now in her mid 30's, mother of two doing very well. His son is older and did not live with them but is also doing well and has his own family now and talks with dad more often than I talk with mine.

Also, this couple has been together for over 30 years. Most heteorsexula couples cannot last that long. My first marriage only lasted 10. Being straight or gay has nothing to do with raising a child. Caring, Loving, Tough we you need to be and a good listener are things that make a good parent.

Just my opinion.

 

[oh21]

I can sort of understand not exposing him to his lover during the initial part of the divorce because it's equally quite common here in the bible belt south for a man who has moved in with another woman after a divorce to be prohibited from having his kids around her.

Now as far as not being able to tell his kid's he gay? That's ludicrous. I mean he needs to be able to explain to his kid that he left because he was gay, and that he still loves his son very much and that sort of thing.

Otherwise what is the kid supposed to think? Daddy left because he hates me and mommy?

That initial ruling just makes me GRRR.

 

[Cletus82]

Now as far as not being able to tell his kid's he gay? That's ludicrous. I mean he needs to be able to explain to his kid that he left because he was gay, and that he still loves his son very much and that sort of thing.

If this kid is a teenager, sure theres nothing wrong with it and the father has every right to explain his situation. After all it's his son.

But if we're talking about a kid under 12 years of age then I highly disagree. A child that age shouldn't have to deal with it and it would be unfair and selfish of the father to expose his son to that. He dosen't need to explain his being gay to his son in order to let him know he didn't leave because he hated him, THAT is ludicrous.

 

[Zergplex]

Zergplex Says

If this kid is a teenager, sure theres nothing wrong with it and the father has every right to explain his situation. After all it's his son.

But if we're talking about a kid under 12 years of age then I highly disagree. A child that age shouldn't have to deal with it and it would be unfair and selfish of the father to expose his son to that. He dosen't need to explain his being gay to his son in order to let him know he didn't leave because he hated him, THAT is ludicrous.

Well why is it ludircious to keep the fact that he's gay from his son? I'm not saying he should explain it to his son in detail, but he shouldn't have to hide the fact that it is or hide his partners. With this ruling he wouldn't be able to kiss his boyfriend in front of his son, in fact he couldn't even bring the boyfriend anywhere near his house at all basically because of his son. THAT is ludicrious in my opinion. Gotta love double standards...

-Zergplex

 

[Cletus82]

Re: Zergplex Says

Well why is it ludircious to keep the fact that he's gay from his son? I'm not saying he should explain it to his son in detail, but he shouldn't have to hide the fact that it is or hide his partners. With this ruling he wouldn't be able to kiss his boyfriend in front of his son, in fact he couldn't even bring the boyfriend anywhere near his house at all basically because of his son. THAT is ludicrious in my opinion. Gotta love double standards...

-Zergplex

How dare his son be more of a priority than his own agenda, christ....

If your talking about this in the sense that this kid is a teenager then I fully agree, and it is ludicrious.

If your talking about this in the sense that this is a child under the age of 12, then congratulations you are an idiot.

Sexual preference should not be in a young childs vocabulary, he should be doing things kids do. Should the father kiss his boyfriend infront of his young child?? HELL NO. Should the mother kiss HER new boyfriend in front of her young child?? HELL NO!

See what I'm getting at here?

And whether you want to accept the fact or not, a young child may be very disturbed watching his father kiss another man as appose to another woman (although I don't think the father should be kissing a woman in front of his kid either).

The only part of this all thats really unfair is the part about this guys boyfriend not being able anywhere near the house. I think the boyfriend should be introduced to his son, not as his boyfriend....but still be introduced. It would be very beneficial if the boyfriend and the son get to know each other.

Later when his son is older, and can understand that gay people aren't evil (as most kids are/were taught) then I think they should all have a sit down and then the father explain his way of life to his now older/more tolerating son.

the end/

 

[Pookie]

ACLU Convinces Tennessee Appeals Court to Reconsider Order Barring Gay Father from “Exposing” Son to Partner

February 9, 2004


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NASHVILLE – The American Civil Liberties Union said today that is has convinced the Court of Appeals of Tennessee to reconsider a lower court order that prevents a gay father from “exposing” his son to his partner.

“We are very pleased that the appeals court has agreed to reconsider its decision in this case,” said Hedy Weinberg, Executive Director of the ACLU of Tennessee. “Courts have no business putting gay parents in the position of having to choose between raising their children and having a loving, committed relationship with their partners.”

During his divorce, the lower court judge issued a restraining order barring the father, Joe Hogue, from “taking the child around or otherwise exposing the child to his gay lover(s) and/or his gay lifestyle.” In September of 2002, the judge found Hogue in contempt of the order and sentenced him to two days in jail after Hogue’s ex-wife complained that Hogue told his son that he was gay. The judge also significantly reduced Hogue’s visitation with his son and gave the ex-wife all decision-making power over the son.

Hogue appealed the contempt charge to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. In January, the appeals court cleared Hogue of contempt because telling his son that he is gay was not part of the restraining order. However, the court went on to say that the restraining order was valid. Following a request by the ACLU, the court has agreed to reconsider its decision.

“For two years now, I have had to hide an important part of my life from my son. I hope the court will understand that visitation restrictions like these deny children honest relationships with their parents,” said Joe Hogue. “It’s hard to teach your child how to be honest and stand up for what’s right if you aren’t even allowed to be truthful about who you are.”

ACLU cooperating attorney Sam Felker of Bass, Berry & Sims in Nashville is assisting in the representation of Hogue. The Court of Appeals is expected to rule on the issue soon.

“Restrictions like the one imposed on Joe Hogue are frequently forced on gay parents,” said Ken Choe, a staff attorney for the ACLU’s Lesbian and Gay Rights Project. “In addition, gay parents often agree to such restrictions without realizing the hardships that they will pose down the road. It is critical for any gay parent faced with the prospect of such a restriction to consult with an attorney who is experienced with issues specific to gay parents.”

Source: http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=14892&c=104

 

[Etoile]

Aha, finally - the kid is 9 years old.

Syndicated columnist Mubarak Dahir wrote A gay dad is sent to jail which was published in last week's Washington blade. That's where I found the child is 9.

 

[Pookie]

Tennessee Appeals Court Says Government Can’t Treat Gay People Differently in Deciding Child Custody and Visitation

March 24, 2004


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NASHVILLE – The Tennessee Court of Appeals today struck down a court order that told a gay parent not to do anything which “exposes” his son to “the gay lifestyle,” according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which represented the parent.

The court went on to say that “[n]either gay parents nor heterosexual parents have special rights,” and that courts should follow the same principles in placing limits on visitation and custody for both gay and straight parents.

“This is a significant decision for gay and lesbian parents,” said Ken Choe, a staff attorney for the ACLU’s Lesbian and Gay Rights Project. “Courts have no business telling parents how to raise their children, and they especially have no business telling parents to be dishonest with their kids.”

The decision came in the case of Joseph Hogue, who was sentenced to two days in jail in September 2002 for telling his son that he is gay. The judge who imposed the sentence ruled that Hogue had violated an earlier order the judge had made prohibiting him from “exposing the child to...his gay lifestyle.” Today, the Court of Appeals said that the order was so unspecific that it could not be enforced.

In January, the appeals court cleared Hogue of contempt because telling his son that he is gay was not part of the restraining order. However, the court went on to say that the restraining order itself was valid. Following a request by the ACLU, the court reversed that decision today.

“One of the great things about this decision is that it makes it clear there are no double standards,” said ACLU of Tennessee cooperating attorney Sam Felker of Bass, Berry & Sims. “Courts will have to follow the same principles for child custody and visitation for gay parents as they do for straight parents. The fact that a parent is gay will no longer be an issue.”

Source: http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=15315&c=104

A wonderful ruling.

 

[south_florida_bicur]

again i will say that the church controls the laws.

in order to fix problems you have to start at the source.