Michael Glatze writes again; removes inflammatory comment from blog

Michael Glatze is back and according to one of the blog posts he left up, he is ready to “rumble.”  

Glatze caused quite a stir in July, 2007 when he announced that the former Young Gay America editor had gone straight. He was interviewed by NARTH’s Joe Nicolosi in addition to being featured by various socially conservative groups.

If you clicked the first link above, you went to a WorldNetDaily article by Glatze where he gives an update of his life since he first left his work as an advocate for gay youth.

The second link is to his blog which is a recent effort. However, he has already removed most of the posts prior to today. ExGayWatch early this morning posted a link to the blog where inflammatory statements were posted. The most troubling was the one titled, “I really can’t stand that man” (see below):


In case it is difficult to read the picture, here is the quote: “Have I mentioned lately how utterly *disgusting* Obama is? And, yes, it’s because he’s black. God, help us all.”

I asked Glatze if he wanted to offer comment. He said the following in an email response: 

Yes, I can. I was talking with some friends about Jimmy Carter’s recent comments along the lines of that anybody who disagrees with Obama is a racist. My friend posted that on my blog, as sarcasm.

Warren, I am about fed-up with the “race card” being pulled, any time someone so much as *suggests* that Obama may not be doing something right. It’s getting to the point, where people are literally losing their minds trying to speak up, trying to have their voices heard. You don’t know how many friends I have who feel crippled, in a country that has its foundations in the notion of freedom and – more importantly – liberty.

You’ll see a quote on my little blog – now – that says, “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” It’s a quote by George Orwell. I’m trying to do my small part, in the midst of all this insanity, to find integrity. 

No, I’m not happy with the current administration. No, I don’t hate Obama because he’s black. What I do hate is evil, and many of the things he has done I would consider evil.

Even with his explanation, this is still very troubling. Readers can decide if they feel the explanation is sufficient. There was no apology, no recognition that the “sarcasm” was incredibly offensive and incendiary. I suspect that WND did not know about this and will be interested to see if they leave the Glatze articles on their site.

UPDATE: Glatze added the previous posts he deleted back to his blog.

68 thoughts on “Michael Glatze writes again; removes inflammatory comment from blog”

  1. Dear Warren

    I hope you are healing from your heart attack, I also had one with bypass surgery.

    I left a comment on Mr. Glatze’s article from March of this year today.

    He was saying that he was engaged to be married this year to a woman in Wyoming.

    I wished him well, but mentioned your study of people who are same sex attracted and marry the opposite sex, as well as the experience of Dr.Borowitz, , who decided in general that he could no longer facilitate these kinds of transitions because they tended to bring misery to his patients and their families.

    It is sad that converts often become more religious than the Pope.

    People like Mr. Weed , who are more open minded make better ambassadors for such a rare successful change.

  2. Why don’t some of you leave this man (Michael Glatze) alone. He’s doing something good. If you look back at what he use to be you will see he has come a long way. No one is perfect and I bet if we looked at your lives through a magnifying glass we could find a lot of imperfections too. That’s the good thing about Jesus. He was perfect in all things at all times. When God looks at you or Michael Glatze he sees his own son that was perfect!

  3. Leah–

    It might be where you’re hanging out. I know a boatload of ex-gays who are quite happy and carry no hidden stash of anger or resentment. Some of us can be downright silly at times.

  4. Why is it that people who choose to leave the gay life style always seem to turn into angry, holier than thou right-wing Christians? Turning into such a person is not a pre-requisite to make this change and I for one did not find it necessary. I lived a monogamous Lesbian lifestyle for 20 years. I did not and do not need to use God as an excuse to make the change. I have considered myself heterosexual for the past 5 years and have been happily married to a man for nearly 3 years now. I would be happy to explain to anyone who is interested what caused the change. In a nutshell I believe I was hiding out from my true self for various reasons and that I was always at heart heterosexual, although clearly very open-minded. The point I am trying to make is that I didn’t make the change because I feel homosexuality is wrong or sinful. I don’t feel I sinned or behaved shamefully in my past life. I think weak people have to blame their behaviors on something outside of themselves.

  5. I know it doesn’t belong on this thread and I know I said I wouldn’t bug you anymore, Eddy — but here’s something else that backs up your suggestion that we really need to understand the “bigger picture”, So, I will post the information on the Exodus thread. (I actually started this day trying to agree with you and give you some credit, but I got sidetracked by my own personal issues with you.) It’s really worth reading and discussing. —–>

  6. It’s OK. Sometimes, people just don’t like each other. Sometimes, there is no good reason for it. They just rub each other the wrong way. We weren’t told to like each other, but we were commanded to love each other. I admit that, when it comes to you, I do not know how. I am truly sorry. I honestly wish I could do both.

  7. Please note the timing of my post. I was responding to your 7:45 post and had not read your 8:06 post. That is partly my fault…you do tend to post in spurts…and I should have checked to see if anything new had come in.

  8. Here I go again! LIke I said, I just can’t help it. If you had said,

    “I think we should slow down a bit and learn all we can about the bigger picture in Uganda — it’s history, politics, religion and culture — so that we can more intelligently and compassionately express our strong opposition to this bill and our desire to help with the real problems”,

    I would have said: “I don’t know how much we can afford to slow down right now, but otherwise, I agree with you completely.”

    But that’s NOT what you suggested. Right after “compromise” came “severity or length of penalty, who or what is penalized, who has to report ‘an offender’, under what circumstances is reporting mandatory,…” That made my blood boil. Would you have suggested the same thing if the law had been directed at ex-gays or Christians?

  9. Eddy ~ Oct 24, 2009 at 10:50 pm

    What is the message that we’re trying to send to Uganda? I know that we disagree with the proposed bill but what’s our counter suggestion? Do we reject ALL of what’s proposed? Are there any points of compromise? (severity or length of penalty, who or what is penalized, who has to report ‘an offender’, under what circumstances is reporting mandatory,…) Do we reject all?

    Yes, Eddy, we reject all of it. ALL of it. Should we “look at the bigger” picture and learn more about Uganda so we can more effectively oppose it? Yes, but not “compromise” with this one. A different bill entirely? One that does not focus on the sexual orientation of the offender but on the actual CRIME? Yes. Compromise, no.

    What kind of “compromise” would you propose? How long do you think gays ought to spend in jail for being gay? Should anyone be required by law to report a gay person or go to jail? Jesus didn’t “compromise” with the mob. Let’s see… OK, only stone her a little…

    He told them to put their stones down.

    Should we suggest that it might be more helpful and moral to enact legislation that focusses on the real problems of child abuse, child prostitution, sexual assault and knowingly transmitting AIDS? Yes.

    But that’s not “compromise”. We say NO to THIS bill. That’s just my often-repeated opinion. Don’t let me stop you or take the “life and spirit” out of you. Suggest a compromise. Maybe you could start a group called “Let’s Compromise With the 2009 Anti-homosexuality Law”. Good luck on that.

  10. Sorry I spoiled it for you Eddy. I really did not think I could take the “life and spirit” out of you. Wow. Once again, you give me WAY too much power. I cannot “allow” or “disallow” anything here. You guys could have gone on without me — and you still can. You could have suggested, as you have in the past, that others simply ignore me.

    I recoiled strongly when you mentioned “compromise”. Your word. Your suggestion. And a very hot button one for me, I admit it. I just couldn’t get past that. It would be like suggesting that we offer a “compromise” to the Nazi’s about the Jews. I see a big difference between Debbie’s advice that we “look at the bigger picture” and your suggestion of “compromise” and (if I recall correctly) “lighter sentences”.

    Yes, perhaps I should have stated my opposition to that sort of compromise once and left it at that. I know I tend to repeat myself and that you get weary of it. I was opposed (and still am) to any sort of “compromise” with this evil bill.

    I am definitely NOT opposed, and did not mean to appear that I was, to learning as much as we can so that we can fight it more effectively. Knowledge is a good thing. Compromise with evil is not.

  11. Actually, I believe that Debbie, Ann and Mary all stepped up with comments…and each one couldn’t get past your ‘compromise’ hot button…even after one of them (Debbie, I believe) brought in the extensive definition of ‘compromise’ that incorporated the notions of looking at the bigger picture, etc.

    I believe, that like me, they saw that no productive conversation was going to be allowed to fly. The ‘no compromise’ objection, along with fresh ones, was going to be raised no matter which of the components of the bill we elected to discuss.

    You say you don’t control…and I actually believe that you don’t mean to…but please consider why you posted so many times re ‘no compromise’…why wasn’t once enough? But everytime anyone tried to move past that, you posted once again in response to each new poster, restating your ‘no compromise’ stance. It’s like each one had to answer to you first…

    As for me, it took the life and spirit right out of me. My role here has changed. I used to defend ‘our’ point of view/biblical belief and the right to hold to it AND dream of making a difference in the overall climate and discussion…enhance overall understanding. I’ve abandoned everything after the AND. It definitely is something that still needs to be done…sometime, somewhere. But, I’m a realist. It isn’t here…at least not with me as a participant.

  12. Ah, come on, Eddy. You asked them! And no one stopped you. Quit saying “I couldn’t”. I just didn’t want to stop and talk about it then. And neither did anyone else if I recall. If they had really wanted to, they were free to chat with you all day about it. Why didn’t they? I didn’t stop them.

    You give me too much power. Repeatedly, you have accused me of “not allowing” discussion. Dicuss whatever you please. It’s Warren’s blog, not mine. I chose, at that time, to focus on the Facebook group because Warren created it and I thought it might do more good to help out there — than bicker with you here. I still think so.

    Back to work.

  13. Eddy, I just posted it on the thead entitled, “Ugandan university hosts dialogue; Exodus letter plays a role”. I strongly encourage folks to follow Eddy’s advice to learn as much as we can — and to ask the right questions.

    Thanks to Lynn David for finding articles like these and for posting them on Facebook. I urge everyone to read these thought-provoking articles — and to join the Facebook group, now over 5,500 members, a lot more than some people expected… 🙂

    Hey, I had to get in a little jab and a commercial, otherwise I would be me, right? 🙂


  14. I have a habit of subscribing to every thread that I’ve made comments on…and I rarely ‘cancel my subscriptions’. Most fascinating (in a trainwreck sort of way) is the Berg vs Obama thread that’s now over a year old… just when you think it’s finally been laid to rest, the corpse starts kicking again.

  15. Oops! I posted it here because we were talking here and I feared you might not see it elsewhere. I can post it there if you think it’s a good idea. Never mind, I think it is, so I will mention it on one of the Uganda threads.

  16. Michael–

    I did appreciate your posting from Fulcrum…it’s the kind of questions and discussions I wanted us to have here on the blog about a month ago. I’m sorry that the rancor that exists between us prevented discussion here but am glad that others have given voice to it.

    I am thoroughly perplexed, though, that with between one to two dozen threads on Uganda…why you posted this on one of the only threads that wasn’t about Uganda.

  17. Sorry for the multiple posts, but in the past 24 hours, a number of really good articles have been posted(hat tip to Lynn David) on the Facebook group. I highly recommend reading them. They explore some ot the important cultural, religious and economic aspects of this law — and good insight as to the mindset of some who support it.


  18. I know this is off the Glatze topic, but I also thought this might be helpful in broadening our understanding as to why this might be happening in Uganda:

    …Topher Mugumya, programme coordinator for research, information and advocacy at the Uganda chapter of the ANPPCAN, …noted in 2007 the widespread myth that having sex with a young child can “cleanse” one of HIV had led to a spike in child rape by HIV-positive men.

    This blanket statement, without any substantial qualification, is all that supporters of the new bill need to further stoke the fire. …Unfortunately much of the debate over the Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 and the serious problem Uganda faces regarding child abuse seem to have become intertwined and confused.


  19. Eddy, I thought you might appreciate this from “Fulcrum” — it suggests what you have been suggesting — namely, that not only should we speak out clearly and firmly against this bill, but we should also pray and try to understand the bigger picture: Here’s a sample:

    Seek to understand more about what is happening and the wider context in Uganda eg most of us in this country would not know the answer to many, if any, of the following questions: (1) how likely is this to become law in its present form, what sort of amendments are realistically possibly, and what will happen if it does enter the statute book?, (2) how does it compare in terms of stringency and penalties to existing legislation in relation to other (hetero)sexual conduct viewed as wrong?, (3) what are the real social and criminal problems which it is a misguided attempt to address and how can they be better addressed? eg has there been a rise in sexual abuse of minors?, (4) is there any reason other than homophobic prejudice and scapegoating as to why the bill and signficant political leaders are particularly targeting homosexual people?, (5) how widespread are the attitudes the bill represents within Ugandan church and society and how can the Christians there and elsewhere in the Communion best reform that culture and its laws?, (6) how is the Church of Uganda ministering to GLBT people?, (7) what are the real threats to marriage and family life in Uganda that this bill claims to be responding to?

    I think that you will agree that these are excellent questions. I hope I did not give the impression that my strong opposition to this bill meant that we should blindly charge ahead, without trying to grasp what it really going on “on the ground”. At this hour, we cannot afford to make that mistake again.

    Here’s the full article: http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=482

  20. Thanks, Michael.

    I don’t know if this will help but I pondered on it a bit this evening. I really do try to say what I mean and mean what I say…something I remember from high school English. I’m very direct which does come across confrontational…but I’ve tried other routes and they come across confusing. (When I try the lighthearted banter approach, it often backfires.) Anyway, it seems sometimes you ‘read into’ what I say…you assume I’m saying or inferring more than what I’m actually saying. (Like in this instance when I only said that my tone was similar to yours but you thought I was accusing you of a nasty or negative tone. But you weren’t mean-spirited in your rebuttal to ‘me’ (the blogger). Yes, you did counter what he said but you weren’t mean-spirited about it. Yet, when I said that my tone was similar to your tone, you assumed I was judging your tone and seemed to miss that, if I was making such a judgement, then I was also judging myself since I said our tones were similar. But I wasn’t pronouncing any judgement; I was only making a comparison. By now, you should know me well enough to know that I won’t beat around the bush. If I’ve got something to say, I’ll say it and I’ll say it loud and clear.

    Anyway, I don’t know if that will help or not. I’m simply asking that you take my words at face value and in context and see if that doesn’t reduce some of the bickering we fall into. You are making sincere efforts and I recognize and appreciate that. I believe I am making them too.

    Peace and kum by ya!

    (BTW: I can’t recall where you suggested that you’ve heard I have a good singing voice and should perhaps lead the nuns in a chorus. I recall saying that I love to sing and that I’m addicted to karaoke…and that my singing has improved. LOL. But I’m not sure that I’ve ever said that I have a ‘good’ singing voice. Sometimes, I feel that I do…and there are certain songs I can deliver pretty well…but good singing voice might be a stretch.)

  21. You are right. I am not ready. I do seem to have a deep, personal reaction to you. I admit it. That’s not a good thing. It’s not very “Christian” of me, but you just seem to rub me the wrong way – a lot.

    I am not blaming you. I am sure it’s my fault, not yours. I wish I didn’t feel it, but some people just do that to each other. Psychologically, it’s probably something I don’t like in myself that I project on to you. A defense mechanism. A form of denial.

    I do get emotional — and that is not a good basis for a debate. I keep saying that I will not bicker with you — and then I go back on my promise to myself. Sorry. You are probably a nice guy, but I can’t get past my gut reaction to you. I will let this drop and go take a hot bath or something. I don’t do pills. 🙂

  22. Michael–

    Take a pill, please. I dissected your comments in exactly the same manner that you dissected me’s comments. I commented on the tone because you continue to assume that I’m coming after you with attitude…and I wanted to forestall that accusation. I did not say that you had attitude in response to ‘me’, I only said that I addressed your words with a tone similar to the tone you used with ‘me’ (in other words, you disagreed with ‘me’ but had no attitude, why then when I disagree with you do you presume attitude.) LOL! But off you went about attitudes anyway.

    Take off the boxing gloves, too. The tone of ‘Bring it on. I’ll fight you…I’ll fight you here and now.’ is downright silly. I merely made a point. We’ve never even got close to having the discussion of whether it’s right or wrong or of the biblical interpretations…and, in those few times when we ventured close, bloggers threw fits and tantrums. (It’s real difficult to have an honest and rational discussion about whether it’s right or wrong when one or more of the conversants continues to say things like ‘how dare you suggest that it’s broken?’ or ‘I can’t believe you said that’. Yes, at least part of that refers to you. The obvious answer to ‘how dare you suggest that it’s broken?’ is that I dare because I believe the bible suggests that. Do I say to you “how dare you suggest that it isn’t broken?” No. I allow you to speak and then I present what I believe without the ‘outrage’ about ‘how can you believe that’ or ‘how can you say that’. We won’t be ready for the discussion until the emotions can be brought into check.)

  23. On second thought, no. NO.

    Not that I am not “ready” for it, but I just don’t want to bicker with you about the Bible — or anything else really. We would spend a lot of time, we would argue over the meaning of words, we would both get frustrated with each other — and to what end? Neither one of us could prove we are right. Maybe we are both right to some extent and both wrong to some extent. Only God knows.

    I will admit that It’s most likey my fault because of my stubborn and sarcastic “tone” — but most of the time, our squabbling seems to get us nowhere — and I am sure that some readers of this blog find our unending tete-a-tete a bit tedious. I know I sure do, but I can’t, for the life of me, seem to resist it. Just for today, I will try. 🙂

  24. There is a possibility that what you believe are the “religious prohibitions” are valid. I am willing to concede the possibility. I am may be “full of crap”. We both have our very strong opinions on those “religious prohibitions” and I betcha neither one of us will sway the other.

    But go for it. No one is stopping you. I am ready if you are. As I have pointed out many times before, I do not own the blog and cannot allow or prohibit any discussion. .

  25. I take exception because I disagree. Isn’t that typical of what all of us do here, including you — give opinions, agree with some, disagree with others? And Eddy please, you have “tone” at times too. I am not the only one who comes across as rigid, opinionated, sarcastic, etc. I know, I know — you think you are less guilty of it, but you’re not blameless…

    But that’s a debate we’re not yet ready for. If we’re not ready for the debate, I don’t see the validity in making summary declarations.

    Why aren’t we ready? I feel ready. You will most likely argue that what you consider to be the “religious prohibitions” are valid — and I will argue that they prohibit something else — or that neither one of us can be sure what they prohibit — or if they still apply or to what extent.

  26. That it is “generally considered” to be misconduct doesn’t make it so.

    And the fact that you don’t consider it to be misconduct doesn’t make that true either…that’s a debate/discussion we may never ever have. ‘me’ was quoting the beliefs of the Dalai Lama…the paths that MG has been following have all held homosexuality in similar regard. (Well, excepting that the Dalai Lama was a touch more lenient…saying that it’s ‘generally considered’ rather than ‘always’ considered sexual misconduct.)

    And heterosexual “pressure”, and “desire” is also quite often a “short period” that “leads to more complication” — like teen pregnancy, illigitimate parents, STD’s and the like.

    Quite true. The quote by ‘H.H’ applied to both homo and hetero sexuals.

    Which brings us to:

    Homo or Hetero, is is how we use our sexuality that matters, not the gender of the person we love


    …which is a fine sounding but unproven opinion/premise that skips right past the possibility that the religious prohibitions are valid. (e.g. if the religious prohibitions are correct, then love would not willingly put another individual at eternal risk for temporal pleasure.)

    But that’s a debate we’re not yet ready for. If we’re not ready for the debate, I don’t see the validity in making summary declarations.

    (Michael, If it feels like I’ve picked on you, please consider my tone and compare it to yours. “me” stepped into the conversation…as a ‘newbie’ I presume…and didn’t even venture personal opinion…didn’t put himself/herself ‘on the line’…and yet you found it necessary to take exception to everything they said. And, with what? The Dalai Lama vs Michael Bussee and Michael trumps?)

  27. Do I think homosexuality should be illegal? Yes, I do. I think the Bible is very straightforward about homosexuality, for a very obvious – and very clear to me, personally – reason.

    And what would suggest as punishment, Michael? The Bible seems very straight-forward, at least in the Old Testament, about that. What if you “fall” — stone you? What should the punishment be?

    I also find it revealing that you “take offense” at being called “angry” or “barking” and then dismiss those who disagree with you on the benfits of bullying as “victim-minded whiners, those lacking a backbone, those denying their manhood”. No, not angry or judgemental at all… Only you, and those who agree with you have “backbone” and are sure of their “manhood”. Such a man, Michael. So sad.

  28. That it is “generally considered” to be misconduct doesn’t make it so. And heterosexual “pressure”, and “desire” is also quite often a “short period” that “leads to more complication” — like teen pregnancy, illigitimate parents, STD’s and the like. Homo or Hetero, is is how we use our sexuality that matters, not the gender of the person we love.

  29. “From a Buddhist point of view, [gay sex] is generally considered sexual misconduct.” -The Dalai Lama

    “Sexual pressure, sexual desire, actually I think is short period satisfaction and often, that leads to more complication ~H.H

  30. It is so encouraging to know that Michael Glatze believes that you should have your butt kicked: http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/2009/11/deja-vu-all-over-again-narth-features-advocate-of-bullying-as-a-growing-experience/#more-5349

    Groove on this quote:

    “Even so much as uttering the statement in the previous paragraph gets the victim-minded whiners, those lacking a backbone, those denying their manhood, to heights of hysteria and indignation. ‘That’s the very type of behavior that leads to bullying in schools.’ Bullying in schools is a part of life, a part of growth. Every time somebody needs to grow up, even just a little bit, the process will be painful and probably not the first choice for what that individual might want to do. Take away every one of these instances in the name of ‘compassion,’ and you will tear out the souls and spirits of everyone you hope to control with such insidious policies.”

    Talk about Stockholm Syndrome! Not to mention an identity crisis, as this fellow has, pinball-like, bounced from gay rights activism to Buddhism to Holy Rolling Christianity to Mormonism and back to the Buddhist camp in Colorado again, albeit as some sort of vague “Christian.” And now he endorses being bullied as character-building. Is an advocacy of rape as philosophically beneficial to the victim not too far behind? He can, after, go ahead and quote Nietzsche’s dictum that what does not kill you will make you stronger.

    Joseph Nicolosi, meanwhile, showcases him over at Nicolosi’s NARTH website as an example of somebody who has “seen the light,” and neither in his interview with Glatze or elsewhere does Nicolosi ever broach some of Glatze’s eyebrow-raising “opinions,” much less refute them. Though Nicolosi does whine quite a bit about his, Nicolosi’s, philosophy of life and sex not being taken more seriously by mental health professionals and the media. I wonder why that would be, Dr. Nicolosi?

  31. Personally, with the degree of drugs, booze, and partying going on at RMSC I found it easier to find “piece” than to find peace, so heading there to find yourself as a conservative Christian seems peculiar indeed. But if you think you are going to continue along this path, you might be shadowed by a seemingly similar story involving a Noe Gutierrez Jr., who wound up having to eat his own words in public.

  32. Incidentally, the Buddhist teachings also have a history of speaking out against homosexuality, considering it to be a perversion of the mind that is a neurosis the inflicted individual will have to work through, either in this lifetime or the one to come.

  33. Oh, I guess that didn’t answer your question, fully, about gay people here at SMC. I have had some conversations wherein I very clearly said that I did not agree with homosexuality, and I was very up front in those conversations. It was not meant to hurt or turn away, but actually meant to be honest and up-front.

    People respond in a variety of ways to such a statement, but I am honest, and do my best to remain humble, kind, and authentic. 🙂

  34. Rick, I do take offense at “barking,” and also “angry man,” but I will admit that tone can sometimes be extremely misleading via the digital or written word.

    I have addressed by personal spiritual journey elsewhere. In short, I came to God in 2004, after being quite a long and lonely way off for many years. Then, about a year after that, I found Shambhala Buddhism and actually prayed to God asking whether or not to explore it, and got a pretty strong sense that “yes,” I should.

    So, I met folks in that community, made friends and – later – job connections, and also continued to hold on to my Christianity.

    When I came to the point of wanting to be vocal about my experiences with homosexuality, I found that I also wanted a much more conservative, tighter-knit spiritual community. It just so happened that I was working with Mormons at that time, at a University, in Eastern Canada (the university recruited in Utah.)

    So, I prayed about that. I did not get a solid answer, or any answer at all, actually. But, I went ahead with joining the Mormon church. I did ask my good aunt, of whom I have written in my previous commentaries on WND.com, as a solid resource, and she told me to avoid the Mormons at all costs. I did not do that, and was in that church for just a few months.

    Then, when I moved to California, I went to a Mormon service, sat in the front row, and listened to the man preach. When he said the word “truth,” I saw nothing even remotely resembling truth in his eyes. So, I left. ‘Wrote a letter to the church governance, and was out. Then, I was hanging out with friends in the Shambhala community out in California, and then I ended up having an opportunity to actually work here in the mountains, in a remote retreat center, which I figured would be a good way to continue to explore everything I’ve been through, and relax into whatever truth was continuing to work its way through me.

    I found that there was no leaving Christianity, through any of this. Even while in the Mormon church, I would read the Bible, and wonder what – exactly – I was doing. Then, after moving to Colorado, I started going to church again, this time at a more traditional evangelical Bible-believing church, and I was so pleased to find that it actually made sense in a way so different from everything else I’d experienced. ‘Sort of like, “ah-HAH.”

    Anyway, I don’t have much connection to Mormons, now, so don’t care too much about their theology. I do have pretty strict Christian views. And, as I’ve mentioned before, I do have an opportunity to be myself – for the most part – here, since SMC is increasingly open to people of a wide variety of religions and world-views.


  35. Thanks for taking time to response to my questions, Michael. Just wanted to know a bit more about you. I appreciate that you shared your relative “age” as a Christian. Everybody starts somewhere. It takes time to come to a fuller understanding of what it means to walk this walk. You are doing it in quite an eclectic place, as Rick pointed out. I pray you come to an ever-deepening knowledge of Christ.

    To answer your questions, here is Debbie, the Reader’s Digest Condensed version:

    I was raised in the South as a Southern Baptist, in church from the time I was an infant. Accepted Christ at 10, but later became a prodigal, wandering from my faith and making some poor decisions. Came back to the Lord right after marriage 28 years ago, but again, went through a period of rebellion as I explored the gay side of life, desires I had suppressed since adolescence. Nearly sacrificed my marriage for “a mess of pottage,” but by the grace of God and with much sacrificial love from my husband, made it back to sanity.

    I have been privileged to serve in a number of ministry capacities over the years. I now facilitate a small church-based group for women who are tired of struggling with same-sex attraction. It is highly rewarding. God had to do a lot of work in me before I was ready for that.

    Spiritual gifts? I think mine are chiefly discernment, exhortation and mercy. Others may say differently.

  36. Incidentally, I see you are back at the Rocky Mountain Shambhala Center. I know it quite well, and I’d be curious to see how you explain your varying Christian …Mormon…Tibetan Buddhist path, and how it fits in with your the highly judgmental and angry man who comes across in the posts. I mean, Christians think Mormons and Buddhists are going to Hell, Mormons thinks Buddhists are going to Hell, and Buddhists believe in reincarnation as a lower life form as punishment. Anyhow, there were more than a few of us queers on staff during my stay there, and I wonder if you are barking judgments at them now?

  37. Mary,

    I think you are still resisting making an actual personal connection with me, and would rather continue to stand slightly above me, looking down, passing ever-so-slight judgments couched as “suggestions.” I would love it we could relate!


  38. Rick, can you let me know what it is you’re referring to? Thanks.

    Debbie, thank you. It’s nice to make your acquaintance. What am I doing, beyond a few interviews, a commentary piece for WND, and some blog activity? Well, what I am doing now – as I have been trying to do for a while now – is really focusing on grounding myself in whatever I can understand to be true. This means, being really sure. It means taking time to be sure. Yes, I do go to a very good Bible-believing church, which is beyond-words inspiring, and I feel blessed to have found it, and I feel very excited – beyond belief – to go each Sunday. I am open, humble as possible, and eager to learn from the incredible preacher, and feel the incredible fellowship family.

    I am also looking toward my future, trying to determine where I should go next (within the next couple years or so), and if that includes more political focus or religious focus… obviously, two areas that I am interested in. I have considered Law School and Divinity School, and may – even – combine them both, which of course is a neat possibility at various schools. But, I am also open to whatever God may put in my path, whatever I may feel prompted to do. And, judging by how relatively “dramatic” my life has been thus far, I am maintaining a sense of openness to whatever possibilities may arise.

    In the meantime, I *am* trying to engage in conversations around current events and religion, specifically Christianity, even as I currently live in a predominantly-Buddhist retreat center (however, there are many folks here who are not Buddhist; plus, I am sort of well-known around these parts as being “Michael, the conservative Republican Christian guy – can you believe it!?”)

    I do find people interested in talking about the Bible, opening their minds to things, and engaging – even if it’s just putting the foot in the water, then pulling it quickly back out.

    I think that my spiritual gifts lie in the area of discernment, and – sometimes – description… of course, not all the time. And, I still consider myself a relative child (maybe teenager) in the faith. There are things I know, completely, then there are things I know instinctively but have yet to completely understand, as well as relate to Scripture. I am *very* focused on the Scriptures, and trying to base everything I know in God’s Word, as opposed to some human’s opinion.

    Phew! Kinda long-winded there… 🙂 Thank you for asking. And you? How do you minister? And… how do you come to have an understanding of *your* spiritual gifts? Thanks for the wonderful questions, that have prompted much thinking on my part…


  39. Michael Glatze’s nastily sarcastic response only further confirms my judgment that the guy is not grooving much on the love of God lately, or feeling much love for his fellow man — at least not by what his words indicate.

  40. I ask that you do take the time to read this, with an open, God-loving heart, and that you resist the urge to judge or condemn, which comes so easy in such a “charged” context. I ask this as a fellow human being, and as somebody who is doing his small part to reach out.

    Michael, I like this paragraph. I just wish you’d follow your own advice with your words.

  41. Greetings, Michael, from another “former” here. Since you mentioned above in your response to Mary that you desired to “reach out,” I am very interested in knowing in what ways you are finding you can do that, beyond commentary, which is limited in scope. Are you working in any ministry capacity presently, or do you plan to do so? I was also wondering what you think your particular spiritual gifts are. Your story is fascinating, naturally. Are you in a support community (church, Bible study or other group of like-minded Christians) for your own benefit? Are you more interested in political commentary/activism or ministry outreach?

  42. I guess I do feel like responding to Mary, who says that I “do seem like just an attention-grabber.” If I could be so honored to have your attention for just a wee bit longer, Mary, I would love it if you would read my recent Commentary at World Net Daily, which has already prompted dozens of good, true Christians to write with praise and a sense of happiness and inspiration. I ask that you do take the time to read this, with an open, God-loving heart, and that you resist the urge to judge or condemn, which comes so easy in such a “charged” context. I ask this as a fellow human being, and as somebody who is doing his small part to reach out.


  43. I thnk the only person I have interest in responding to is Rick, who claims the ability to discern “genuine humility and compassion.” I’m honored to meet such a gifted human individual, and hope that I am able to please you with other character traits that fall within your divine judgment, at some point.

    In the meantime, if you care about humanity, you – sir – will be wise to realize that accusations against allies embolden the enemy. And, in this current battle against evil, every decision counts.


    Michael Glatze

  44. Michael- I can assure you that it was you. But, since you agree, I guess the point is moot (other than calling me a liar I guess).

    Warren- completely agree with your post re: having respect for the office of the President no matter the disagreement. It always amazes me that the far left calls the far right the most outlandish things and then gets up in arms when it happens the other way around (and vice versa). If we all treated the “other side” the way we expect them to treat us, a lot more things would get accomplished in this world.

  45. Just for the record, so we can separate the voices that are speaking.

    I, like Michael Glatze, am an ex gay and a christian. HOWEVER, I do not support racism of anykind, even jokingly, or to get attention. And as a christian who was once gay, I do not believe in the criminalization of homosexuality.

    He seems like just an attention grabber but is entitled to his opinion. Since he is exgay I am speaking up so that gays and others do not confuse exgay with his persoanl opinions.

  46. Rick,

    I have found that the most deep contentment, in any set of circumstances or experiences, comes with a calm and knowing quietness.

  47. I’d give Mr. Glatze the greater benefit of a doubt as how he’s “changed” for the better if his statements, declarations, tweets, and posts evinced some genuine humility and compassion — but they don’t. Rather, he communicates a lot of anger, and my gut tells me all is not well with the man.

  48. Cool, Warren.. ‘sounds like you’re at least attempting to have a bit of a backbone.

    Incidentally, your headline is now incorrect.

  49. For the record, I disapprove in no uncertain terms of comparing Obama to Hitler or degrading him in any way. I disapproved of it when Bush was treated this way and I do the same with Obama. I vigorously disagree with Obama on many things but my tradition teaches me to respect and pray for the leaders of the government.

  50. From CNN Politics.com: Carter’s Statement

    When a radical fringe element of demonstrators and others begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler or when they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy, those kinds of things are beyond the bounds,” the Democrat who served from 1977-1981 told students at Emory University.

    “I think people who are guilty of that kind of personal attack against Obama have been influenced to a major degree by a belief that he should not be president because he happens to be African American.

    “It’s a racist attitude, and my hope is and my expectation is that in the future both Democratic leaders and Republican leaders will take the initiative in condemning that kind of unprecedented attack on the president of the United States,” Carter said.

    Carter goes on to speak of the distinctive racist history of the South.

    Eugene Robinson in The Washington Post suggested that racism may not be as prevalent as Carter believes but wonders if it doesn’t explain some of the excessive animosity towards Obama.

    Of course it’s possible to reject Obama’s policies and philosophy without being racist. But there’s a particularly nasty edge to the most vitriolic attacks — a rejection not of Obama’s programs but of his legitimacy as president. This denial of legitimacy is more pernicious than the abuse heaped upon George W. Bush by his critics (including me), and I can’t find any explanation for it other than race.

    I’m not talking about the majority of the citizens who went to town hall meetings to criticize Obama’s plans for health-care reform or the majority of the “tea bag” demonstrators who complain that Obama is ushering in an era of big government. Those are, of course, legitimate points of view. Protest is part of our system. It’s as American as apple pie.

    I’m talking about the crazy “birthers.” I’m talking about the nitwits who arrive at protest rallies bearing racially offensive caricatures — Obama as a witch doctor, for example. I’m talking about the idiots who toss around words like “socialism” to make Obama seem alien and even dangerous — who deny the fact that he, too, is as American as apple pie.

    This whole discussion was kicked off by Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress. As the House members who voted to rebuke Wilson — including seven fellow Republicans — understand, calling the head of state a liar in such an official setting is way out of bounds. Grumbling and even booing come with the territory, but a flat accusation of mendacity is an impermissible sign of disrespect. Nobody ever called Bush a liar when he was speaking in the House chamber.


    I haven’t been to your blogsite prior to today. I wasn’t keen on your Obama post but I do understand that you were trying to gain attention…to raise a stir. So I can believe that you were making a sarcastic statement rather than speaking out of the abundance of your heart. You succeeded in part…you got some attention.

    We have an ongoing ‘discussion’ going on re “Berg vs Obama”. Perhaps you’ll find it engaging. Just search those words in Dr. Throckmorton’s search engine and you should find the discussion easily.

  51. Everything that is said in those quoted texts makes perfect sense, to me. In fact, I couldn’t have said it better myself. 😉

  52. Holy Buckets! I had flipped out there for a moment. Before anyone else makes my mistake. Brady is referring to MICHAEL GLATZE and it’s that Michael who is commenting…not ‘our’ regular commenter Michael who always uses his last name.

  53. Let me clarify my first post (I should have worded it differently).

    After reading Glatze’s initial WND post, where he used the word “punished” about personal behavior (implying homosexuality), I asked if he meant we should push for laws to punish homosexual behavior. He wrote back with the above response.

  54. Michael- I’d imagine you speak to a lot of people, so you not remembering me is not that surprising. Here is a piece of the email you response you sent to me:

    I think the question of punishment for homosexual behavior ties into the role we believe society should play in regulating morality and enhancing the life of its citizens. I happen to believe that society should care for the lives of its citizens, and should do so through law. I happen to believe that harmful things should be punished by law. In the past, I have speculated what might’ve happened in my own teenage development if – for example – homosexuality had been more obviously punished by law, not just because it’s seen as “bad,” but, because it is a destructive behavior. Similarly, drugs are punished by law. I think sometimes, when we grow up, we forget that laws are there to protect us, rather than to punish us.

    Then later:

    This is by no means a well-thought-out response, but I am passionate (yes) about this topic, and excited to be speaking with you about it. Do I think homosexuality should be illegal? Yes, I do. I think the Bible is very straightforward about homosexuality, for a very obvious – and very clear to me, personally – reason. And, we have strayed so far from so much of what helps humanity to survive … in our increasingly-permeated laws…. that it’s almost disheartening.

    I’d be happy to forward the email to both you and Warren if you’d like.

  55. Michael please get help. I’ve met many like you who have a desperate need for attention and will say pretty much anything to get it.

    Stop. Take a deep breath. Call a doctor.

  56. Hello, Warren and commenter named “Brady.” Brady, I never such such a thing in a conversation with you – but, it is easy to spread lies, so congraulations.

    As for the topic of Obama and racism, I am happy you took the bait and engaged me in this conversation, so that I have a *small* bit of a platform upon which to make the statement I’ve been waiting to make for some months now: PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT OBAMA ARE RACISTS.

  57. I had a conversation over email with Glatze about 6 months ago (maybe a bit longer). In the email chain, he told me he wished the government would recriminalize homosexuality because he believed people should be punished for their sins.

    Michael is claiming adamantly that he is not crazy in the beginning of the article. I’m not going to go far enough to call him crazy, but in my dealings with him, and in what he is saying here (the WND article and the blog post), I’d say he is, at the very least, very troubled.

    As a side note–did he just say that all gay people (men I guess) can just become straight by “manning up?” Glad to know it’s so easy.

Comments are closed.