Box Turtle Bulletin

Glatze not presenting credible death threats

Those of you who have felt concern for the physical safety of Michael Glatze and his family can rest at ease. After some communication, it has become clear that Glatze either cannot or will not confirm that he has actually ever received a direct threat to his personal life or wellbeing.

He has read unkind things written about him on the internet and he’s hurt. And he does appear anguished that people may doubt that he loves his God.

I also believe that he genuinely does think that his testimony is relevant and challenging and that gay people want him dead. But the threats – as best I can tell – are amorphous and the fear seems otherwise based.

I wish Michael Glatze peace and healing. I think the kindest thing is to give him our best wishes and hope that his marriage and his life go well.

Michael Glatze reports death threats

Last week I posted a commentary about Michael Glatze’s marriage. Michael showed up in the comments section and posted his email address, inviting those who wished to ask him questions to do so out of the scrutiny of the public eye.

We discourage this as it seems that often those who seek to deny basic civil rights to their gay neighbors have difficulty distinguishing between challenging questions and death threats. In fact, whenever I see an anti-gay activist go onto a gay website and invite communication, it almost invariably means that quite soon they will be reporting death threats. And even if they have a long pattern of inviting communication, they will insist that they are in fear.

Although I redacted Glatze’s email, it was not before a few readers attempted to engage in dialogue. And, indeed, Michael Glatze was no exception to the ‘death threats are coming’ rule.

Shortly after getting his marriage photos out for public consumption, Glazte sent a letter to Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality (sic) in which he says,

And, thank you to those who have prayed for mine and Rebekah’s protection. It is not easy to have people consistently send you death-threats, simply because you left homosexuality and then decided to reach out, in many attempts at writing down your thoughts, to those who ALSO want to leave homosexuality.

And in the period since he invited unmonitored conversation, he wrote a commentary for World Net Daily in which he strongly implies that his life has been threatened. In a piece titled To hateful ‘gays’: Please respect my choices (though it’s unclear why he thinks that WND is the best vehicle to reach gay people, hateful or otherwise):

For those who have an interest in reading what I have to say, I have a few more things to communitcate here. For example, I want to make a little “shout out” to all of the angry homosexuals in our country who are currently spreading all sorts of hate and aggression on pro-homosexual blogs. Look, I am not interested in defending myself. I don’t really need to do that. I understand your plight, your point-of-view. I understand the desire to want me to be crazy, or lost in my head and mind, or confused. I understand that it would be just easier if I didn’t exist, or I would just crawl into a hole somewhere and die. But I’m not going to do that.

The only option would be to kill me, and I know that is a thought that has crossed some of your minds. So in a way, this is a plea for my own and Rebekah’s personal safety. I would like to ask that instead of desiring to plot my death, you may consider the possibility that I do have a legitimate right to life and a legitimate right to my own a) spiritual decisions, and b) life decisions – not to mention the wisdom and perspectives those decisions have given me.

And then later

I do believe that homosexuality is a flaw, a mistake, a distortion and something from which one can be completely restored. I do know that this viewpoint flies in the face of people’s personal decisions, as well as some popular politics in this world. And I am additionally aware that this viewpoint labels me as some kind of “right-wing fanatic” who ought to just be “wiped out.” I do pray to God for my safety every day.

These are rather serious charges. Death threats are not inconsequential and should Glatze – or anyone else – receive threats on their life or that of loved ones, it is extremely important that they contact the civil authorities immediately. These are criminal acts. Death threats in the form of email are traceable and police do take such threats seriously.

Michael invited me to come to him directly if I had any questions about anything he’s written, and I took him up on his offer. I’ve asked Michael to help explain these death threats and offered to cooperate should they have been initiated by his posting his email address at BTB.

BTB readers know better than to make threats of this nature. However, should any of you have made threats against Michael – or suggested that he should be “wiped out” – please let us know and we can try and give him some sense of assurance that BTB readers aren’t seeking to physically harm him.

I’ve not heard back from Michael, but I’ll certainly let you know whether he replies with any verifiable legitimate threats. Or if he doesn’t.

Michael Glatze marries

On October 26th, ex-gay writer Michael Glatze and his lovely wife Rebekah were married under the canopy of trees in a riverside park. The bride wore a gown and veil; the groom wore khakis.

I am of two minds in writing this. One the one hand, Michael Glatze has presented himself as being on “the other side” of homosexuality and as having been “healed”. His marriage is very likely going to be used by him as an evidence of his testimony. Commenting is fair game.

On the other hand, Glatze’s history of religious confusion and his bizarre racist and sexist writing suggest that he may well be suffering from mental health issues. Discussing his marriage feels a bit cruel.

I don’t know anything about his new wife Rebekah, but I wish them both much wedded bliss. I hope Glatze finds true happiness in his marriage.

However, Glatze’s writing in May of this year suggest that Michael Glatze is not fully reconciled with his chosen sexual identity and that Rebekah may find her new life trying. Glatze’s hypothesis is that homosexuality is a perversion of the spiritual union that should be between man and God. (WND)

Thus, since God is male and His creation – man – is male, the appropriate relationship (under the Headship of Christ) is to be satisfied in spiritual union with God. That is why Paul, in 1 Corinthians 6, says we have “become one spirit” with God. And, it is also why Paul describes, in Romans 1, the pattern of degradation that takes place when men turn from God. Ultimately, it results in homosexuality, because the man – seeking for a spiritual fellowship with God – positions himself either as a “god” for another man, or in the position of worshiping another man as “god.”

And with God as Glatze’s spiritual male lover, there may not be much room for Rebekah. And, to the extent there is, it will not be an equal union.

Men lead society, and women follow. What men elect to do will have an effect on the responses of women. That, also, is the natural order of things…

This simply does not have the hallmark of something that will end well.

The LaBarbera-Birther-Dominionist link

To paraphrase a common phrase, “wackadoodle extremist nutcakes of a feather flock together”. So it should be no surprise to find anti-gay activists dancing the tango with “birthers” and other fringe political gadflies.

Currently anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera is waging war on Dr. Warren Throckmorton. Throckmorton engages in the grievous sin of believing that therapists – even Christian therapists – should allow same-sex attracted clients who are seeking congruence with their religion to determine their path without overlaying the therapists’ views, even if it means that “some religious individuals will determine that their religious beliefs may become modified to allow integration of same-sex eroticism within their valued identity.”

But Throckmorton infuriates LaBarbera even more by questioning the efficacy of reparative therapy and noting that “it appears from the research that change is infrequent in attractions”. LaBarbera sees this as heresy or, in his words, Throckmorton has “lost his faith in God’s ability to change people.”

LaBarbera has begun a letter and media campaign seeking to threaten Throckmorton’s employment at Grove City College. And he’s rounded up a number of “concerned citizens” to assist in his quest. Not surprisingly, they are as, ummm, colorful as is Peter himself.

First up was Linda Harvey. We know Linda well here at BTB and are familiar with her efforts to endanger the wellbeing of school children who may be discovering their same sex attractions.

But, for those who may not know the extent of Linda’s animus and how it goes to the very core of her self definition, these words from her “testimony” might shed some light.

It was 1992. I had spent months reading the Bible seriously for the first time in my life, and I was trembling on the brink of a stunning decision: to become a Christian, but not just another pew-warmer. I was increasingly tempted ­ beyond all conventional wisdom — to accept the Bible as true, which would make me one of “those” Christians.
…
So I continued on, hopeful in the joy of discovery. Plodding through the morality code passages in Leviticus ­ lambs being sacrificed, how to deal with boils and leprosy– I concluded some of the messages were symbolic, some were particular to that specific ancient time, while other messages were timeless. It was one of those timeless verses that stopped me cold.

“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.”

Whoa. If ever there was a definitive statement, this was it. I read it again, then continued on a little farther, looking for the escape clause. Not finding any, I read the passage again. Then I did some cross-referencing to find relevant verses about homosexuality in both the Old and New Testaments. This led me to Leviticus 20, Romans 1, and 1 Corinthians 6, passages conveying a consistent platform, strong and uncompromising. I mulled it over for a while, recognizing that it was probably a sub-category of the commandment against adultery. And for a woman thoroughly grounded in heterosexual desires, I had a very interesting reaction. I closed the Bible and stopped reading it for several weeks.
…
A troubling internal debate threatened my new faith. Even back then in 1992 ­ ancient history in the “gay rights” movement ­ I had absorbed the notion that only obtuse bigots opposed homosexuality. Every enlightened person knew that the freedom to practice homosexuality –responsibly, of course — would surely not threaten the mainstream, but would simply meet the needs of a small, harmless and kind of pitiful minority.
…
For several weeks I stewed about this, strongly tempted to return to the comfort of my familiar plastic beliefs. Opposing forces wrestled for authority in my mind and heart as I considered first one, then an alternative view of “truth.” What was the reality behind this issue? It was the first time, but not the last, where I would encounter a Joshua 24 moment. I needed to “choose this day whom I would serve.” I didn’t recognize the moving of the Holy Spirit yet, how He presents evidence before each of us in unique ways to drive us toward understanding. In deciding what to believe, or even how to sort it all out, I would be starting a journey toward either one or the other kingdom of two completely different masters.

Linda’s very essence – as “Christian not a pew-warmer” – is grounded in the rejection of the idea that gay people are non-threatening and the adoption as literal, relevant, and objectively true a Scriptural passage that calls for the execution of gay men. To Linda, this was the separation between “plastic beliefs” and choosing to serve God; her entire “journey” is based on the belief in death for homosexuals.

Next up was Steve Baldwin, “the former Executive Director of the Council for National Policy, a former State Assemblyman in California, and a longtime conservative Republican activist.” Baldwin wrote Grove City College’s president, seeking to discredit Throckmorton and threated to “no longer be recommending Grove City College” to “hundreds of conservative high school students” who ask him for a recommendation.

As might be expected, Baldwin is no friend of the gay community. His article written for the Regent University Law Review, Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement, is a recitation of fabrications and oft-repeated but debunked demonizations.

It is difficult to convey the dark side of the homosexual culture without appearing harsh. However, it is time to acknowledge that homosexual behavior threatens the foundation of Western civilization the nuclear family. An unmistakable manifestation of the attack on the family unit is the homosexual community’s efforts to target children both for their own sexual pleasure and to enlarge the homosexual movement. The homosexual community and its allies in the media scoff at this argument. They insist it is merely a tactic to demonize the homosexual movement. After all, they argue, heterosexual molestation is a far more serious problem.

Unfortunately, the truth is stranger than fiction. Research confirms that homosexuals molest children at a rate vastly higher than heterosexuals, and the mainstream homosexual culture commonly promotes sex with children. Homosexual leaders repeatedly argue for the freedom to engage in consensual sex with children, and blind surveys reveal a shockingly high number of homosexuals admit to sexual contact with minors. Indeed, the homosexual community is driving the worldwide campaign to lower the legal age of consent.

The thesis is breathtaking in its dishonesty.

As we have shown, the premises behind such claims are based on the false assumption that every adult who molests a child of the same sex is, by default, homosexual even if he identifies as heterosexual, is married, and has a long string of opposite sex victims.

Of course, activists like Baldwin don’t limit their extremist to gays. He also advocates for library censorship. But his greatest influence was as the executive director of the Council for National Policy, a dominionist secretive right-wing umbrella group.

After Baldwin was Priscilla Smith, “a freelance writer based in Indiana”. Smith disapproved of an email that was purportedly sent by “David Bier, Grove City College Senior” to LaBarbera in which he states, “Your recent article on Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton is yet another of your pathetic attempts to mislead otherwise moral individuals into the belief that God disapproves of homosexuality.”

This convenient email – whether genuine or contrived – was Smith’s jumping off point. She ranted:

They are about to graduate a young man from their so-called Christian institution without teaching him that God not only disapproves of homosexuality, but He describes it as an abomination, unnatural, dishonorable, perversion, depravity.

I don’t know much about Ms. Smith. If she is a freelance writer, she’s rather selective about making her writings available.

After the elusive Ms. Smith, the Peter ran a commentary by Michael Glazte. As readers may recall, Glatze had been a gay activist (though few knew who he was, he thought of himself as a “rising star”) who became ex-gay and converted to Mormonism before settling on conservative Christianity while working at a Buddhist retreat. Currently he seems to hold a grudge against Throckmorton, and lent his voice to the attack.

I have experienced Professor Throckmorton’s forked tongue, as he has pretended to seek “my side” of the story various times, then turned around and told a biased side of the same story, in a public sphere, with the intention of discrediting my testimony and shaming my stance for Gospel truth. As we have all seen, throughout Christian history, it is quite easy for people to create false worlds, to skew human perception, to persecute Christian truth. Sadly, this professor at a seemingly-reputable Christian school, has engaged in these tactics, with the outcome of persecuting the very truth he supposedly is teaching, atop his perch.

Aside from Glatze’s bitterness, he betrays a worldview that heightens the concerns that have been expressed about his mental stability. He seems to think that “objective” and “subjective” are filtered through dogma rather than observations so that “objective truth” becomes that which he’s been taught and now believes.

It is funny. In this world, truth seems to almost be subjective. Then, you meet Jesus. In Jesus, truth is objective. It is from this vantage point that I write this.

Such a way of thinking lends itself easily to cults and manipulation. It certainly has led to some peculiar political views. After advocating for bullying in schools (“Bullying in schools is a part of life, a part of growth“) and making some racists comments about President Obama, even NARTH removed him from their site.

But the very latest participant in LaBarbera’s campaign of personal destruction is also perhaps the most peculiar. Margaret Hemenway, described by the Peter as “a Virginia parent”. She pretended to be the mother of a 16 year-old girl who, after attending Catholic school, was considering attending the evangelical Grove City College.

We want our children to grow up to be healthy and happy–enjoying a wholesome college experience–not one which will undermine their years in a safe and nurturing Catholic educational environment. It is remarkable that the College would permit this professor, given your school’s Biblical charter, to crusade on behalf of homosexuality–would you also allow your staff to advocate openly for adultery, pornography or prostitution–other sexual sins? Where do you draw the line and how is the professor’s conduct and activity consistent with your Christian mission? We would look forward to your reply.

Hemenway first blipped my radar in 2008 when she claimed in an article hosted by Human Events that her daughter’s first grade teacher told her class that she was marrying another woman and “read aloud, “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” about two male “gay” guinea pigs, promoted by the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender Lobby for children.” She claims to have lodged a complaint.

But Margaret Calhoun Hemenway is no Virginia parent new to politics. Her bio states

Mrs. Hemenway spent 15 years on Capitol Hill in various staff positions in the Senate and the House, followed by five years in the Pentagon. She is married to a native of Washington, D.C. and is a proud parent of three school-age children.

And Hemenway is not shy in expressing her views. Currently she contributes to FamilySecurityMatters.org. And it is from her writings there that we find Hemenway’s more peculiar political activism.

It seems that Hemenway’s father-in-law, John D. Hemenway, is a lawyer heavily involved with the “Birther” movement, a collection of conspiracy theorists who believe that President Obama is not eligible to be President because he was not born in the United States.

From a letter he wrote to Rupert Murdock:

That problem is this: the man now occupying the White House is likely Constitutionally unqualified to hold the office.
…
As an attorney, I facilitated a lawsuit (Hollister vs. Soetoro et al.) in the United States District Court (D.C. Circuit) demanding that Obama produce his birth certificate or satisfactory substitute evidence.

But I am not trying to peg Margaret with guilt by association. She has written or her own faith in the birther movement.

Mr. Obama’s lawyers are now threatening my 84-year-old father-in-law, through Judge Robertson, with penalties of legal fees for pursuing the truth about Mr. Obama’s birth. This threat of financial sanctions is meant to silence all of us who remain unsatisfied with equivocations by the Obama camp about his legal qualifications to become President, and to punish us for pursuing our Constitutionally-guaranteed right to redress.

The Obama campaign, with questions about his birth in Kenya to his Kenyan father (a British citizen), and his years in Indonesia where he was known as Barry Soetoro (taking the surname of his stepfather), was not nearly as forthcoming as the McCain campaign. What was posted in support of Mr. Obama’s eligibility was not a birth certificate, but something that resembles a “Certification of Live Birth” or COLB, which, even if authentic, does not prove “natural born” U.S. citizenship. In Hawaii, a Certification of Live Birth is issued within a year of a child’s birth to those who register a birth overseas or one that takes place outside of a hospital.

So in his desire to punish and discredit Dr. Throckmorton, anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera has surrounded himself with a most fascinating collection of characters: a woman who’s very identity is defined by her adoption of death-penalty based Levitical prohibition on homosexuality, a dominionist whose writings on homosexuality mirror those of Paul Cameron, an unknown freelance writer named Smith, an ex-gay with a grudge and a history of sporadic religious associations and a questionable worldview, and a Birther.

As history progresses and even conservatives begin to see gay people as human – as their friends, family, neighbors and co-workers – those who are left behind are increasingly appearing as fringe and, frankly, more than a little weird. And these are just the ones that Peter is taking public.

Whatever Happened to Michael Glatze?

You may remember him. He’s the young former editor of GYA magazine, which was aimed toward gay youth. He later decided go the ex-gay path and briefly became a featured speaker on the ex-gay circuit. He was even featured in an interview with NARTH’s Joseph Nicolosi (PDF: 544KB/12 pages) and spoke at their convention that year. Then there were reports that he abandoned Evangelical Christianity and embraced Mormonism. And then, he seemed to have disappeared.

David Roberts at Ex-Gay Watch has gotten us caught up to date. He’s still out there, looking for attention. He recently posted a column for World Net Daily which confirms his flirtation with Mormonism. But now he’s back to Evangelical Christianity. He’s also at great pains to reassure readers that he’s not crazy. Unfortunately, as Roberts points out, Glatze’s blog posts leaves his mental health open to question. That blog, by the way, was “straightened up” — kind of — after Ex-Gay Watch exposed his racists rants.

Donald Hank: “Big Sodomy” Wants To “Silence” Cameron

I rarely read WorldNetDaily, an omission I intend to correct immediately. I almost missed this interesting nugget, “Will ex-gays bring down ‘Big Sodomy’?” The title alone is worth the price of admission, which, of course, is free.

Donald Hank (who I’ve never heard of before, but there’s his picture in case you’re curious) is all excited that a gay activist by the name of Mike Glatze (who I also had never heard of before) has decided to switch teams and become ex-gay. And Hank believes that somehow this unknown activist is supposed to be some sort of body-blow against the whole homosexual-industrial complex that Hank has dubbed “Big Sodomy.”

Frankly, I don’t know what the fuss is all about. I’ve been rather bemused by the reaction to Glatze’s homo-hostile broadside. He’s not the most interesting anti-gay writer, nor is he the most talented. And I also can’t help noticing that Glatze is trying to stretch his fleeting fifteen minutes of fame into a sixteenth minute by hitting virtually every web site that mentions his name with either an email or a long-winded comment (or both).

But enough about that. The passage that I found most interesting wasn’t Glatze’s energetic and ongoing attempts to draw attention to himself, but this:

Of course, the promulgation of knowledge and data concerning the link between alternative sex and disease is hampered by the bullying tactics of the elite. Thus, only a few facts are known at all to some of the public (such as the results of a study in Scandinavia showing that men in same-sex marriages die 24 years earlier than their counterparts in the general population), and these facts aren’t mainstream, thanks to the media blackout on this issue and the muzzling of opponents under color of law. And that, in turn, is thanks to the activists.

Sure enough, these “facts” aren’t mainstream, but not because of a media blackout or any muzzling by “Big Sodomy.” The facts aren’t mainstream simply because they are utterly ridiculous and demonstrably false. These statistics comes straight from Paul Cameron’s latest oeuvre, “Federal Distortion of Homosexual Footprint,” which I analyzed in detail last April. Cameron’s actions surrounding that paper led to his condemnation by the Eastern Psychological Association just a few weeks later.

But now we have Donald Hank — whoever he is — adding his name to a long roster of those who rely on the discredited “science” of a man who credits the Nazis for “curing” homosexual . And unfortunately, that roster keeps growing. These are the people who continue to spread Paul Cameron’s bogus statistics, despite his censure by four different professional associations and his draconian “solutions” for the homosexual problem. Does Hank also agree with Cameron’s manifesto?

I would love to hear Hank’s thoughts on this.

My Thoughts on the Conversion of a Previous Gay Activist

Michael Glatze was quite young when he became involved in gay activism and the gay community. And the gay world applauded him. He wrote for XY and then became the executive editor for GYA. He spoke on panels and received awards. He was a roll model and a young hero.

But time went on and his 20’s ended. And something changed. Michael began to see his life as empty and meaningless and, not unlike many before him, he looked for what set him apart from others whom he thought had better lives. Michael decided that it was because he was gay, and so he discovered himself “leading a movement of sin and corruption” and came out “from under the influence of the homosexual mindset”.

And today, Michael has done that which others who suddenly find a religious conversion have done. He wrote an article decrying the evils of homosexuality.

In looking at Michael’s column, printed in WorldNetDaily, some observations came to mind:

First, Michael has adopted the peculiar language of anti-gay activists. Although he lived for many years as gay, he cannot now use the word without quotes and instead must use “homosexual” instead. Other examples – of which there are many – include “the grip of homosexuality”, “the homosexual agenda”, and our old favorite “the Truth”. This article is not written to be understood by Michael’s previous audience, nor by the secular public. It is a “testimony” written in Christianese for a purpose.

Michael also hints at the “causes” that are favorites of the ex-gay and anti-gay movement: weakness, a missing father.  He even tries for Sickness! and Disease! – though the most he can come up with is intestinal cramps and an upset stomach.

Second, Michael provided some clues as to what his future plans are:

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.

Poland, a country all-too familiar with the destruction of its people by outside influences, is bravely attempting to stop the European Union from indoctrinating its children with homosexual propaganda.

I think we can safely assume that Glatze will soon become the public face of some political anti-gay action.

I do not know Michael Glatze and perhaps it is unfair to speculate about the motivations for his conversion. Nonetheless, I think I have a guess as to why some, if perhaps not Glatze, find themselves leaving gay activism for anti-gay activism. It is because activism on its own is not fulfilling. And when you face a disappointment – or when you are no longer getting the attention that you once had – bitterness and anger can set in. 

Many of us have been fortunate to have been able to craft a life that involves many different components – professionalism, activism, spirituality, friendships, and much more. When we face a disappointment in one area, there are other things for us to do. But unfortunately, I have seen those who build their life around just one aspect, be it work or religion or politics, and when things sour – as they always will – there was no balance to give their life meaning.

And I think too often activists make this mistake. They have no life outside their insular world. There is no religion or faith to give perspective. There is no non-activist friend network, or family backup or other forms of getting away and seeing your life from the outside. And when a blow comes along that shakes your perspectives, there’s no one to turn to who isn’t part of the problem – so instead they turn to that which gives substance and validation to their bitterness and anger.

I don’t know if that is what happened to Michael Glatze. But I do know that we’ve seen conversions like his before. We’ve seen those who quite publicly “left the homosexual lifestyle” to step up anti-gay efforts… only to later quietly recant their anti-gay media blitz.

I wish Michael Glazte much happiness. If his conversion gives him meaning, then I am happy for him. But from what I’ve seen before, I fear he’s abandoned one cause for another. And when this new cause disappoints, I hope he will be able to reconsider his focus and his base and find a way to give his life a breadth of experience and meaning and find pillars that can hold him when he sees his new friends for what they are.