Former Gay Youth Activist Joins an Ex-Gay Blame Game
In news with echoes of the Charlene Cothran story earlier this year, the editor of a pioneering gay youth magazine has announced that he is no longer gay.
But instead of responsibly addressing and treating his addictions, Michael Glatze blames same-sex attraction alone for his bad behavior, and suggests that gay equality laws have “sanctioned behaviors that harm life.”
In the article “How a ‘gay rights’ leader became straight” on WorldNetDaily today, Glatze writes:
Homosexuality, delivered to young minds, is by its very nature pornographic. It destroys impressionable minds and confuses their developing sexuality; I did not realize this, however, until I was 30 years old.
As editor of Young Gay America, Glatze was given awards acknowledging his stand for equal rights. Now he claims homosexuality came to him “because I was already weak”. He attributes his sexual “confusion” to the death of his father when he was 13, and his mother when he was 19. He was 14 when he decided he was gay, and 20 when he came out publicly.
In 2004, he launched YGA as a “virtuous counterpart” to adult-oriented gay magazines. In today’s column, he claims it was a pretence, and that the magazine was “as damaging as anything else out there, just not overtly pornographic”.
Glatze says he eventually drew his own conclusions about the movement he was leading, which he now says was “a movement of sin and corruption”. He left the magazine with the parting words “Homosexuality is death, and I choose life,” left on his computer screen for his colleagues to see. He says that coming out from under the influence of the “homosexual mindset was the most liberating, beautiful and astonishing thing I’ve ever experienced in my entire life.”
The reformed Glatze leaves us under no illusions about his current position on homosexuality:
[Homosexuality] prevents us from finding our true self within. We cannot see the truth when we’re blinded by homosexuality.
We believe, under the influence of homosexuality, that lust is not just acceptable, but a virtue. But there is no homosexual “desire” that is apart from lust.
Homosexuality allows us to avoid digging deeper, through superficiality and lust-inspired attractions – at least, as long as it remains “accepted” by law. As a result, countless miss out on their truest self, their God-given Christ-self.
Lust takes us out of our bodies, “attaching” our psyche onto someone else’s physical form. That’s why homosexual sex – and all other lust-based sex – is never satisfactory: It’s a neurotic process rather than a natural, normal one. Normal is normal – and has been called normal for a reason.
Abnormal means “that which hurts us, hurts normal.” Homosexuality takes us out of our normal state, of being perfectly united in all things, and divides us, causing us to forever pine for an outside physical object that we can never possess. Homosexual people – like all people – yearn for the mythical true love, which does actually exist. The problem with homosexuality is that true love only comes when we have nothing preventing us from letting it shine forth from within. We cannot fully be ourselves when our minds are trapped in a cycle and group-mentality of sanctioned, protected and celebrated lust.
I was repulsive for quite some time; I am still dealing with all of my guilt. … Now I know that homosexuality is lust and pornography wrapped into one. I’ll never let anybody try to convince me otherwise, no matter how slick their tongues or how sad their story. I have seen it. I know the truth.
Glatze has every right to live as he chooses. However, it is tragic when a personal decision to refrain from homosexual behavior is used as an opportunity to slander an entire community. If Glatze’s own chosen experience has been as ugly and unfulfilling as he describes, it is understandable that he has sought help — but it is sad that his story has become a platform for yet more prejudice and discrimination against those whose choices have been healthy and positive.
Most troubling is how Glatze uses his experience to call implicitly for a change in the law. When he writes that homosexuality is damaging “as long as it remains “accepted” by law,” how is that to be interpreted other than as a call to reverse equality laws? Towards the end of his column, he praises Poland’s leaders for resisting “homosexual propaganda”; this just two days after the UK’s Observer newspaper reported that thousands of gay Poles have fled to Britain in an attempt to escape increasing persecution from the Polish Government.
Doubtless many in the ex-gay movements will have us believe we are intolerant in criticizing Glatze. It is not his personal decision to change his behavior that we denounce, however. In Glatze’s championing of prejudice and discrimination, and his slander of millions of gay and lesbians, his words fully deserve the condemnation not only of gays and lesbians, but people of conscience everywhere, whether straight, gay or ex-gay.
Additional coverage:
Box Turtle Bulletin
Edge Boston
PinkNews.co.uk
Some Guys Are Normal
Warren Throckmorton
This, coupled with the way Glatze contacted World Net Daily detailed in this article makes Glatze sound like so many of the self-appointed leaders in the gay community who have far more interest in the business end of video cameras than toiling tirelessly in the shadows for change.
Does anyone remember Luke Sissyfag’s many miraculous conversions?
There are so many opposing pressures at work here; so many cataclysmic changes going on in religion and in the way homosexuality is perceived especially by the young people coming out of the fundamentalist right, that I come away from this story feeling very sorry for Glatze.
Whether it be the magazine publishing business or the rightwing issue advocacy community stoking the fires of intolerance for political end, Glatze seems to have a history of getting to the party too late.
I think one thing that separates me from the many people who post here is that I am Jewish and hold liberal theological viewpoints. To anyone reading this, gay or ex-gay or anything, the idea that any religion is the ultimate Word of God, needs to be put aside. You need to open your eyes to the reality that evangelical America is just as dangerous as any other cult that is out there. I grew up actually in a fundamentalist Christian home, but my mother comes from Jewish roots. After studying Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, along with the Gnostics, and many other versions of the Bible, I had to come to the reality that to assume that the Bible is the literal words that God wanted us to read here in the United States in 2007 is truly lying to ourselves. I especially love when people like Jan above talk about Satan tempting us because in her mind she has created this imaginary world filled with devils, angels, and spirits that is nothing more than pure fantasy.
In Matthew 1 and Luke 3, both discuss the lineage of Jesus from Joseph. Some Christian fundamentalists will tell you that Luke 3 is actually the lineage through Mary even though there is nothing historically that would ever suggest this. Even if that was the case, there is a 15 generation difference between both lineages, making for a very interesting generation gap between Mary and Joseph. Jesus had to have been born of Davidic lineage in order to be the Messiah. That is something firmly agreed upon by Christian and Jewish scholars alike. Jesus was the adopted son of Joseph (because he was the son of God through immaculate conception according to the Christian Bible) and therefore any lineage through Joseph cannot be considered a legitimate connection to King David. Lineage as far as kings are concerned from the Hebrew Bible has to be to passed from biological father to biological son. Either Matthew 1 or Luke 3 is not telling the truth and most likely both.
So many might ask, why am I bringing this up in a discussion about ex-gays? Well, fundamentalists need to realize that the Bible is filled with contradictions (this is one nugget of literally hundreds of conflicting information provided in just the New Testament). The sooner that people begin to acknowledge that the Bible does contradict itself, the sooner people can realize that the idea of being gay does not have to conflict with strongly held religious beliefs. There are good things taught in Judaism and Christianity that should be applied to our daily lives. It does not mean though that every last word is in fact meant for us to take as a literal truth in today’s world. We have to take into account the knowledge we have gained from science, history, language, sociology, psychology, etc. and recognize that the Bible does not always match up with what we know about these fields of study.
Micah: Shalom, my fellow Yid!
Unfortunately, this is a step closer to “secularism” that many will not take. I’m glad you’ve embraced your Jewish heritage – Mazel Tov. You also take a very logical view of scripture. however, religion – especially Charismatic or fundie religion – is not about logic, but faith. In fact, many who’ve gone through such illogical circumstances that they need something beyond logic to help them reconcile with their lives embrace fundamentalist and “cultish” faiths. This seems to be Michael’s case, and the case of many other ex-gays who’ve left behind a tumultuous life only to blame it on the “homosexual lifestyle.”
From the WND article:
“In 2005, Glatze was featured in a panel with Judy Shepard, mother of slain homosexual Matthew Shepard, at the prestigious JFK Jr. Forum at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.
“It was after viewing my words on a videotape of that ‘performance,’” he writes, “that I began to seriously doubt what I was doing with my life and influence.”
Why is Judy Shephard specifically mentioned here? It’s almost like they are trying to imply that his appearing with her was part of his realization of what he was doing being wrong. That just shows again how this seems to be so much less about “helping” gays than about using him as a weapon against gays and gay rights.
He had a few quotes in this 2005 Time article.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1112771-4,00.html
“Because he routinely sees young gays on MTV or even at school, a 14-year-old may now feel comfortable telling friends that he likes other boys, but that doesn’t mean he is ready to enfold himself in a gay identity. “Today so many kids who are gay, they don’t like Cher. They aren’t part of the whole subculture,” says Michael Glatze, 30, editor in chief of YGA Magazine. “They feel like they belong in their faith, in their families.” ”
“The political part is what worries Glatze. “I don’t think the gay movement understands the extent to which the next generation just wants to be normal kids. The people who are getting that are the Christian right,”"
–
Even back from mid-2005, these comments sound like talking points. I remember at the time I was taken aback that someone from the “gay community” was making such comments, since the Christian right rarely treats gays as “normal kids”. WND, the site he is now such an eager participant at, is not exactly a good example of a non-political organization.
He talks like he’s an alien within his own world. At least, back THEN it was his own world.
OK, for the record, those people here who think that I chose my sexuality because of something disfunctional happening during my childhood are wrong. My parents are both living and involved in my upbringing. My earliest memory is from when I was 18 months old (yes true) and I remember developing a ‘crush’ on another little BOY. I have never ever been attracted to girls or women, they just don’t do it for me.
James, I agree. A simple viewing of Jesus Camp demonstrates that (to be fair, Jesus Camp was a particular, unique example, but I think the use of Ted Haggard and others in the film demonstrated how many in the Christian community will use children in negative ways).
Micah,
If you’re the Micah that I’m thinking of, then welcome back! I have greatly valued your comments and your insight at XGW in the past.
I sincerely hope you’ll stick around and continue to educate us, as circumstances permit.
Micah,
The genealogy of Jesus in Matthew is obviously figurative. If you read it carefully it is split into three sets of fourteen, each group of fourteen ending with Abraham and then David. Jesis is presented figuratively as the culmination of six groups of seven. He is the seventh generation of seven in it’s entirety. I’ll leave you to fill in the significance of 7 in Jewish theology.
No reputable conservative Bible teacher would suggest that the genealogy in Matthew is entirely literal, so don’t go about suggesting that we do.
Shall we do a proper “contradiction” next time?
Micah and Peter O:
Matthew’s geneology was an attempt to prove to a Jewish audience that jesus is the Jewish messiah. It failed miserably because of flaws that occur in it that disqualify him for messiahship (Taking it as the literal interpretation of the geneology.) Peter stressed a point that is very important, which is numerology. Specifically, the number 14 is important because that is the numerical value for the name “David” in Hebrew. Whether Evangelicals take the geneology of Jesus literally can be debated – I’ve heard testimonies for both cases. In the end I think Fundies tend to take the geneology literally, because they take everything else in the bible literally – despite the fact that it differs from Luke’s geneology. Now, I’m not sure how they justify taking BOTH literally. I have yet to find this out.
Glatze’s own experience is just that. He cannot speak for an entire community of individuals. I am sorry that he makes out his addictions as a direct result of him being gay. I belive that is what happend to me when I was going through Ex-gay therapy. One of the reasons I belived I went through the ex-gay ministries is because of my addictive behavior. Now that I am addressing the additions and not my homosexuality I am a much better person and have more piece than ever before.
Micah, Emily and Peter,
As we frequently point out, slicing and dicing each other’s beliefs is not appropriate here. We deal with matters of faith as they intersect ex-gay issues, not to prove or disprove any one in particular. Most of the time we will be dealing with evangelical Christianity, but again only because most ex-gays tend to be of that faith and custom. We will discuss Judaism when JONAH is the topic, etc (or if someone here wants to share something from their own perspective), but not the merits or faults of Judaism over another faith, ok?
Otherwise the discussion always devolves and we are distracted from the real topic.
Thanks.
David R,
Point taken, but to be fair I was challenging the view put forward by Micah that the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew is nonsensical, not criticising Judaism.
Emily K – You’re right that the Matthian genealogy raises a number of issues of interpretation and fundamentalism, but evangelical fundamentalism actually tends to prize scholarcism. Literalistic interpretations of Scripture can still recognise poetic and metaphorical devices.
That’s why I addressed my comments to all three of you. Yet you went on in your post to respond to prior comments, which in turn requires a counter comment, etc. So if you understood my point, why keep going?
David I know this isn’t a religious-based blog, but wherever people will discuss theology, Jewish or Christian, i’ll be there to chime in. It seems to be an inevitable occurance since many ex-gays are those struggling with faith, too. I’m not defending the three of us, i’m just explaining myself.
Emily,
That’s fine. The problem comes in when we say something about how your religion is wrong, or silly, etc, or how ridiculous it is for someone to believe in a mythical god, or how my belief is right so yours must be wrong (or any number of subtle ways this can be said). Saying that “in my faith we hold that Jesus is God” or whatever is fine.
And naturally, if we find hypocrisy in the actions or statements of an organization which claims certain beliefs, then we may have to dig deeper into doctrine. The main thing to remember is that our discussion of faith is incidental to how it relates to the ex-gay equation, not something we want to do for it’s own sake.
That is not to say that somewhere these are not valid discussions, just not here. We have enough on our plate as it is
And the nominees for the most obsequious article are…
Sometimes I wonder if this is really a sincere conversion for Michael or if this simply is a ruse to get YGA Magazine up and running again. It appears that YGA Magazine had published 5 or so issues and then ran out of money (www.ygamag.com). In the April/May 2005 issue of YGA, Mike wrote an ed-op piece titled “God: You.” I don’t doubt that Michael wants a relationship with God, but his conversion came from looking at God from different religions and viewpoints, including meditation (he was working for Shambhala Institute during 2006(http://www.shambhalainstitute.org/Fieldnotes/Issue11/index.html). Mike then became involved with the Mormon Church in Halifax and was baptized in late April 2007. I wonder if Mr. Glatze really has a deep understanding of the true grace of God? It sounded like he went to a revival meeting of some sort and came back accepting the Lord as his savior and then decided to publically announce this to the world. If so, let us hope that as he grows in his faith, he will achieve a better understanding of God’s true and ultimate grace for all.
I love Jerusalem. It is the most holy city in my Christian faith. But it always bugs me the structure that stands out the most, undeniably beautiful architectural wise, is the Muslim Dome of Rock at Temple Mount (the one with the huge pure gold egg-shaped dome). I wondered with all the mighty power of God, why He does not take the dome out of His most holy city? My last trip there, looking at this golden dome shining through Jerusalem night sky, I had a revelation, also is my point here:
Just like the Dome of Rock is a thorn in a Christian’s eye (me), a gay person can be a thorn in a straight person’s eye, a muslim can be a thorn in the eye of a Jewish person, or vice versa. Guess what, the problem is not about the thorn (or whatever bugging me, different from me), the problem is my heart. The real question is why God put the thorn in my eye?
We, as Christian are busy converting gay, convincing gay is wrong, but not that quick nor busy repenting hating gay people, hurting gay people, lack of love for gay people. It is not gay that is the problem, it is our wicked hearts that quick to judge others, condemning others, not loving others as our own that God is after! Love God, and love your neighbors as your own. Who are our neighbors? For straight, it will be gay, for Christians, it will be muslims, for human, it will be animals.
As a Christian, I found it ironic during my own encounters that many times gay people, muslims, or even dogs are way way way more loving and lovable than Christians. Point made, we Christians are not that much better than we will like to perceive comparing to others. As christians, we should be humbled by the love of God, out of the reverance of the love of God, love others, period. Otherwise, we Christians are the problem!!! We become the stumble block of God’s plan for gay’s salvation, for muslim’s salvation, or whoever we have labeled.
If God All Mighty allows a muslim golden dome in His holy city, who are we to say what is not allowed, except our own wicked hearts? If God All Mighty loves us all, not even left one kind of animal out of Naoh’s Ark, who are we to hate, except our own wickedness? If God All Mighty has reserved His judgement on the very last day, who are we to judget on this particular day, except ourselves?
Amen!
Two comments: First, some here have said that Michael Glatze blames a life of addiction on homosexuality. Perhaps he states that elsewhere, but I don’t get that from his WND article. I think he is saying that, whatever else he was doing that was self-destructive before his change of heart, homosexuality was one of those things.
He wanted something good, like unconditional love, but sabotaged his own efforts by trying to find it using sex:
“Homosexual people – like all people – yearn for the mythical true love, which does actually exist. The problem with homosexuality is that true love only comes when we have nothing preventing us from letting it shine forth from within. We cannot fully be ourselves when our minds are trapped in a cycle and group-mentality of sanctioned, protected and celebrated lust.”
I’m glad he points out that all people want “true love”. We do. Yet, whenever we use sex outside God’s intended purpose, we will always sabotage our search for the kind of intimacy Michael is referring to here.
Secondly, I can appreciate the spiritual search that some here are on. The God of the Bible does love them. However, the Holy Spirit never contradicts the Bible. If you think that God the Holy Spirit has told you that homosexuality is ok, that is not the Holy Spirit. One of the nicest things about God is that he gave people a book to clarify where he stands. If an impression of what God might be saying to me contradicts what he’s already said in the Bible, then my impression is not from him. That may seem too simple, but why wouldn’t God make what he wanted us to know simple? The best teachers I’ve ever had were good because they could bring tough subjects down to my level, not just because they knew a lot. And wouldn’t an infinite, all-knowing, and loving God be the greatest teacher?
Thank you.
Statements by Glatze are all over the place, and I’m not going to regurgitate them here any more than they have been. They don’t all contain the same messages so I’m not sure how you or anyone else can say with certainty what he actually means.
As to your other comments, I would encourage you not to speak to others as though they are spiritual infants – I weaned off the scriptural milk decades ago. My belief in the core tenants of the faith is strong and no one will shake it. My understanding of less central issues, such has homosexuality, is in harmony with my actions. Is my entire life perfect, hardly. But God has my permission to alter my understanding as He sees fit.
I actually wish much of the church was as self aware and contemplative of these issues as many gay Christians I know. Divorce and remarriage for reasons other than death or unfaithfulness is not only tolerated, but many believers don’t seem to even be aware that their remarriage is considered adulterous by scripture in a far more specific and authoritative manner than even the most negative view of homosexuality.
The clarity and urgency of scripture seems to exist in the mind of the rebuker more than you might admit, Robb. Why do you act as though it is all so cut and dry?
Robb, heterosexual people do this too.
Robb, there are so many unstated assumptions in your post that it would take forever to untangle them (like what is true love vs. love?). As far as scripture goes, I doubt anyone follows the scriptures as stated (when was the last time you stoned your child? When did you last eat shrimp? etc. I know, I know–later on some law remained and others did not…I have heard that a million times, but if it is true, how do you KNOW what law to stick to and which law is no longer there? Jesus gave two laws, and homosexuality is fine with those two laws).
As for homosexuality, some people have lust; others do not. My spouse and I have our 15 year anniversary next week. Trust me–it is not about lust or sex, and even if there was more of that in the beginning (hey, heterosexuals go through that too), it is purely about love and companionship. Last week we went to my mother-in-law’s place. She is invalid, and we had to help fix her computer and help her around the house. Today, we drove and hour and a half to fix a ramp for my spouse’s aunt and uncle. If our relationship was lust based, this would not be happening. We take care of each other and love each other unconditionally. What I found is true love. If something happens to my spouse, I doubt I would be able to find someone so perfect for me. I truly feel that if there is a “one,” I found him. We have as much intimacy as any straight couple I know. While some gay people (or straight people) may not acheive this, we have, and it has nothing to do with homosexuality. We love each other pure and simple. We were talking today about retirement, and part of our plan is that I will help cover him since I will probably always work–this is not fly by night lust. This is long term planning love. I hope that it is the same thing you and Michael seek, but don’t assume gay people can’t have true love.
Sounds like more than a lot of straight people I know
. The truth is, with a nearly 50% rate of divorce in the US, a lot of people seem to have trouble finding unconditional or “true” love from another person, even in an opposite sex relationship.
It’s kinda weird but I actually like this. I mean, homosexuality is different for everyone. For some it’s not deep rooted but for others it is. When I first heard that a gay man can change his orientation it scared me, because I would not want to be pressured into changing my orientation by an outside source (namely friends, family, employers etc.). This would be a way society would combat the homosexual population and it would only get tougher for those who choose to remain gay. In addition, it’s hard because if you had personal bonds with that person who decides to change, you would then lose common ground with that person.
The part that boiled my blood is these freakin websites that promote the change or these scientific studies that would declare a whole population as one that has a condition or a problem. That in itself is wrong. No one has the power to condemn or diagnose someone they have never met. Also, some of the statements of the “so called” ex-gay are really harsh and demeaning to the people who still live a gay lifestyle.
My point hear is, there are really no definates when it comes to people (gay or straight). There are men and women who are deeply conflicted with their gay attraction, to the of suicide. The one thing I can say is don’t be afraid or angered by this, because it’s better to see a person happy than unhappy.