Judge speaks his mind on Homosexuality,leftist whiners lose their minds


Doesn't sound like anyone is really complaining

Keith Elston, who has handled gay adoptions in Philpot’s court, said he has asked “a few more questions of gay and lesbian clients than he asks to some of the straight clients I have had” but that none of them were “out of bounds or appear to reflect his personal biases.”

The judge sounds like a person who can keep his personal opinions separate from his legal responsibilities- good for him.
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:
Yeah what a weirdo
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:

Agreed. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is trying to skeeze a cheap feel off this guy.

636099719572741892-timphilpot.jpg
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:
Yeah what a weirdo

I like the fact that despite his reservations about gay marriage and adoptions that those personal views do not appear to be effecting any of his rulings in family court.
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:
Yeah what a weirdo

I like the fact that despite his reservations about gay marriage and adoptions that those personal views do not appear to be effecting any of his rulings in family court.
I agree and he deserves thanks for that. Still, "I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug..." Who says that? :laugh:
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:
Yeah what a weirdo

I like the fact that despite his reservations about gay marriage and adoptions that those personal views do not appear to be effecting any of his rulings in family court.
I agree and he deserves thanks for that. Still, "I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug..." Who says that? :laugh:

It sounds like he needs a non-homo hug. lol
 
Philpot, who ministers several times a week to men, said his “biggest bugaboo with the whole thing” is how it has affected friendships between straight men.

“I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug; we love each other at a certain level,” he said. “I don’t hug the way I used to.”


I can't hug the same way since dudes started marrying each other. What a pansy! :lol:
Yeah what a weirdo

I like the fact that despite his reservations about gay marriage and adoptions that those personal views do not appear to be effecting any of his rulings in family court.
I agree and he deserves thanks for that. Still, "I meet with men four or five times a week and we hug..." Who says that? :laugh:

It sounds like he needs a non-homo hug. lol

Either that or a bathroom stall with a hole in the wall.
 

Interesting that he brought up that polygamy is next.

Not sure if it's polygamy or family marriage, but both eventually will be. Just a matter of time.

Yep- once they made inter-racial marriage legal, the 'slippery slope' started......LOL

Nope, it opened the door when they removed "one man and one woman". There was a biological reasoning for it to remain only between two.

I have yet to find a single marriage law in which sex is a requirement in the contract, you?

so no reason to limiting the partnership, except for age and competency.
 

Interesting that he brought up that polygamy is next.

Not sure if it's polygamy or family marriage, but both eventually will be. Just a matter of time.

Yep- once they made inter-racial marriage legal, the 'slippery slope' started......LOL

Nope, it opened the door when they removed "one man and one woman". .

Nope- the Constitutional argument in Loving v. Virginia was identical to the argument in Loving v. Virginia.

But I find it amusing that you think that ruling that a couple do not need to be opposite gender somehow opened the door for one man and one woman who are brother and sister to be allowed to marry.
 

Interesting that he brought up that polygamy is next.

Not sure if it's polygamy or family marriage, but both eventually will be. Just a matter of time.

Yep- once they made inter-racial marriage legal, the 'slippery slope' started......LOL

Nope, it opened the door when they removed "one man and one woman". .

Nope- the Constitutional argument in Loving v. Virginia was identical to the argument in Loving v. Virginia.

But I find it amusing that you think that ruling that a couple do not need to be opposite gender somehow opened the door for one man and one woman who are brother and sister to be allowed to marry.

When, exactly, were the words "one man to one woman" forced removed from State marriage laws?

Good God dude, take credit where credit is due dummy.
 

Forum List

Back
Top