Michael Glatze with pro-homosexuality activist Judy Shepard in his former life as a “gay” activist, speaking at a 2005 Kennedy School forum. Glatze can be reached at michaelglatze@gmail.com.

By Peter LaBarbera 

Today, when Americans celebrate their freedom and independence, a man living in Canada is cherishing a more profound liberty — from spiritual bondage to homosexual sin. Michael Glatze, a former rising star in the “gay” movement — and co-founder of “Young Gay America” magazine — publicly “came out” of homosexuality on the web pages of WorldNetDaily yesterday. Click HERE for WND’s breaking news story about Glatze.

Concerned Women for America has a wonderful online interview with Michael Glatze, which you can listen to by clicking HERE. (The set-up page for the CWA interview is HERE. Glatze can be reached at michaelglatze@gmail.com.)

In his WorldNetDaily column, “How a Gay Rights Leader Became Straight,” Glatze writes:

Part of the homosexual agenda is getting people to stop considering that conversion is even a viable question to be asked, let alone whether or not it works.

 

In my experience, “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….

 

I believe that all people, intrinsically, know the truth. I believe that is why Christianity scares people so much. It reminds them of their conscience, which we all possess….

 

As a leader in the “gay rights” movement, I was given the opportunity to address the public many times. If I could take back some of the things I said, I would. 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.

I suspect that most people — Christian and non-Christian alike — would cheer Glatze’s transformation, if the dominant media would dare report it fairly. But the pro-homosexuality crew at ExGayWatch is all in a tizzy. For them and all homosexuality advocates, Michael’s rejection of their lifestyle poses a problem, as it undermines the central “gay” lie (myth) of our age: that “being gay” is intrinsically “who a person is,” and that homosexuality is morally neutral. (Most argue that it is innate, and now the homosexual “christian” movement mischievously asserts that this “orientation” is a gift from God.) 

Glatze’s story is more evidence that homosexuality is what a person does, and how he lives, and that lifestyle/behavior can be changed. If God through Jesus Christ can rescue sinners from drug, alcohol and pornography addictions, how can we deny His power to rescue homosexuals?

I and others have warned Glatze of the hateful, not-so-“gay” attacks that will be coming his way, now that he’s defected from the “gay” lobby’s team, as it were, to God’s. Sure enough, in one of the posts about Glatze on Warren Throckmorton’s blog, ExGayWatch’s Timothy Kincaid uses Glatze’s Christian transformation to recollect the 1978 Jonestown, Guyana mass murder (think Kool-aid and crazed cultist Jim Jones). Thanks for that helpful insight, Tim. 

Michael Glatze told CWA that he left an outgoing message on his computer at “Young Gay America” (the magazine’s website, www.ygamag.com, was down at press time): “Homosexuality equals death. I choose life.” He made the right choice, but God, it seems, was also doing the choosing. Pray for this young man as we thank God for His gracious work in one repentant sinner’s life — a testimony of what He can do in this nation if we as a people humble ourselves, reject worldly agendas, and return to following Him.

 TAKE ACTION:  Help counter the pro-homosexual lobby’s smear campaign attempting to “Bork” Dr. James Holsinger, President Bush’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General. Here’s how: 

1. Call your U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121 or write them (http://www.congress.org/) and politely urge them to support Dr. James Holsinger, Jr. as Surgeon General; the members of the Senate Health Committee, which will first consider Holsinger, can be found HERE (e-mail the committee at: help_comments@help.senate.gov) — but Holsinger’s nomination will likely be voted on by the whole Senate, so tell your Senators to use their influence to insure that he is treated fairly;
2. Thank the White House (202-456-1111 or -1414; e-mail: comments@whitehouse.gov; www.whitehouse.gov/contact) and urge the President to stand by Dr. Holsinger and not to be swayed by the pro-homosexual lobby’s distortions and anti-Christian bigotry;
3. Tell your friends to support Dr. Holsinger with a quick e-mail or call.

Click HERE TO READ DR. HOLSINGER’S 1991 PAPER, “PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF MALE HOMOSEXUALITY,” which liberal, pro-homosexual groups are distorting to discredit him.

 __________________________

Dear Americans For Truth Reader, 

By Peter LaBarbera 

Folks, anti-Christian homosexual activists and their liberal allies are out again in force to take down another good man — Dr. James Holsinger, Jr., President Bush’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General — who happens to agree with the ancient Judeo-Christian moral understanding of homosexual practice as unnatural, unhealthy and wrong.

The ABC report below is Orwellian in its framing of the campaign against Dr. Holsinger — a Christian medical doctor (cardiologist) who also holds a doctorate in anatomy and physiology. Holsinger is being vilified because he wrote in 1991 that male homosexual sex practices are unhealthy, and because he believes that men and women can abandon homosexuality.

The ABC report below — which includes a politically correct quote by the spokesman for the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) — implies that Holsinger’s writings, such as his 1991 paper, “Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality,” are obsolete and way outside of the scientific mainstream. Hello… Has there been some change in human anatomy (perhaps some hyperactive “evolutionary” mutation in the last 16 years) that suddenly makes rectal sex between men natural and good for the human body?

Please take a few minutes to read Dr. Holsinger’s 1991 paper, reprinted on our website. It was written for a United Methodist Church committee studying homosexuality. See for yourself if the paper has the ring of extremism. Here’s an excerpt:

From the perspective of pathology and pathophysiology, the varied sexual practices of homosexual men have resulted in a diverse and expanded concept of sexually transmitted disease and associated trauma. “Four general groups of conditions may be encountered in homosexually active men: classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with hig gel la species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, hepatitis non-A, non-B, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (fecal incontinence, hemorrhoids, anal fissure, foreign bodies, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)” (Owen, 1985).

By Fran Eaton, Illinois Review

At the risk of sounding like a real ogre and with all pause, I’m going to have to give a thumbs down to this weekend’s box office hit, “Shrek the Third.”

The lovable Shrek debuted the third in a series this weekend, and while the big guy is taking unfair hits for American children’s skyrocketing obesity problem, there was another issue raised in the movie that I’ve seen no one yet address.

For me, it wasn’t the monstrous size of the lead character Shrek that was the problem with this newest release. Shrek and his sweet wife Fiona are what’s right with the story. They are large positive role models of common sense, compassion and honesty in a bizarre world of revengeful, evil fairy tale characters.

Shrek’s personal dilemma of overcoming the fears of becoming a father for the first time endears us all the more to the big guy. The ending is happy and prolife, which is great for kids and their fathers to see.

Shrek’s not the problem. It’s the awkward inclusion of a travestite and the uselessness of the character himself (herself?) in the story that is troubling.

Right in the midst of a warm “traditional family” setting, the film writers place a man dressed as a woman in with Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Snow White (the good gals). The crossdressing character simply doesn’t make sense, except as a ploy to desensitize children and parents to transgenders.

Homosexual activists now are careful to not only use the term “LGBTs” as a unit, they are more boldly now declaring lesbians-gays-bisexuals-transgenders as a unit pushing together as one for civil rights. Those confused about their sexual roles are pushing for equal rights to be free to publicly demonstrate their odd sexual behavior. For transgenders, appearing to be a different sex in public is their particular turn on. We need to understand that acceptance of this sexual behavior is just another step moving our world toward sexual chaos.

It’s disturbing there’s not more outcry about this sly tactic being used in a movie made for children. But I suppose after being reminded recently of Jerry Falwell’s concern about the Teletubbies characters’ sexual orientations and the post-heaven going ridicule and hatred those who dare to question LGBTs tactics are likely to endure in the mainstream media after their passing, some have shyed away from publicly tackling the topic. That’s understandable.

But well-meaning parents who plan to take their kids to see a movie that grossed $122 million in the opening weekend should be aware . . . it’s the subtlety of the movie makers’ agenda to desensitize that could be more harmful to your children than encouraging them to eat sugary cereals in the morning.

Fran Eaton is editor of Illinois Review, a conservative blog.

Excerpted from AnnCoulter.com; read the whole column HERE. Note the part about Tinky Winky: yes, Virginia, there is a conspiracy — a conspiracy in the liberal, pro-“gay” media to make good people committed to Biblical values look stupid — and Falwell was a victim: 

JERRY FALWELL — SAY HELLO TO RONALD REAGAN!
May 16, 2007

No man in the last century better illustrated Jesus’ warning that “All men will hate you because of me” than the Rev. Jerry Falwell, who left this world on Tuesday. Separately, no man better illustrates my warning that it doesn’t pay to be nice to liberals.

Falwell was a perfected Christian. He exuded Christian love for all men, hating sin while loving sinners. This is as opposed to liberals, who just love sinners. Like Christ ministering to prostitutes, Falwell regularly left the safe confines of his church to show up in such benighted venues as CNN.

He was such a good Christian that back when we used to be on TV together during Clinton’s impeachment, I sometimes wanted to say to him, “Step aside, reverend — let the mean girl handle this one.” (Why, that guy probably prayed for Clinton!)

For putting Christ above everything — even the opportunity to make a humiliating joke about Clinton — Falwell is known as “controversial.” Nothing is ever as “controversial” as yammering about Scripture as if, you know, it’s the word of God or something.

From the news coverage of Falwell’s death, I began to suspect his first name was “Whether You Agree With Him or Not.”

Even Falwell’s fans, such as evangelist Billy Graham and former President Bush, kept throwing in the “We didn’t always agree” disclaimer. Did Betty Friedan or Molly Ivins get this many “I didn’t always agree with” qualifiers on their deaths? And when I die, if you didn’t always agree with me, would you mind keeping it to yourself?

Let me be the first to say: I ALWAYS agreed with the Rev. Falwell. ….

… I note that in Falwell’s list of Americans he blamed for ejecting God from public life, only the gays got a qualifier. Falwell referred to gays and lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle. ….

… Also the ones who promote the gay lifestyle in a children’s cartoon.

Beginning in early 1998, the news was bristling with stories about a children’s cartoon PBS was importing from Britain that featured a gay cartoon character, Tinky Winky, the purple Teletubbie with a male voice and a red handbag.

People magazine gleefully reported that Teletubbies was “aimed at Telebabies as young as 1 year. But teenage club kids love the products’ kitsch value, and gay men have made the purse-toting Tinky Winky a camp icon.”

In the Nexis archives for 1998 alone, there are dozens and dozens of mentions of Tinky Winky being gay — in periodicals such as Newsweek, The Toronto Star, The Washington Post (twice!), The New York Times and Time magazine (also twice).

In its Jan. 8, 1999, issue, USA Today accused The Washington Post of “outing” Tinky Winky, with a “recent Washington Post In/Out list putting T.W. opposite Ellen DeGeneres and Anne Heche, essentially ‘outing’ the kids’ show character.”

Michael Musto of The Village Voice boasted that Tinky Winky was “out and proud,” noting that it was “a great message to kids — not only that it’s OK to be gay, but the importance of being well accessorized.”

All this appeared before Falwell made his first mention of Tinky Winky.

After one year of the mainstream media laughing at having put one over on stupid bourgeois Americans by promoting a gay cartoon character in a TV show for children, when Falwell criticized the cartoon in February 1999, that same mainstream media howled with derision that Falwell thought a cartoon character could be gay….

Click HERE to read Coulter’s entire column

UPDATE on this story: Chicago Sun-Times religion columnist Cathleen Falsani — author of a controversial column titled, “Sigh of Relief over Falwell’s Death” — contacted Americans For Truth late Friday afternoon for the sole purpose of requesting that we remove her copyrighted photo from our website (which we did). When AFTAH President Peter LaBarbera sought to engage Falsani in a discussion about her anti-Falwell column, she curtly said she was only calling for the “legal purpose” of removing the photo. “I’m not interested in engaging in dialogue with you,” she said.

When LaBarbera countered that this was odd since Falsani is a “reporter” who talks to people for a living, Falsani replied that she is not a reporter, but a columnist. (As you can read below, she was only recently relieved of her reporting duties at the Sun-Times.)

Said LaBarbera, “This story only gets weirder: a religion columnist cruelly trashes a conservative minister days after his death, then refuses to discuss her column with a critic. It seems Cathleen Falsani can dish it out but she can’t take it. We echo Illinois Review editor Fran Eaton’s call for Falsani to be fired as a Sun-Times religion columnist. As one who is obviously bigoted against Bible-believing religious traditionalists, she should not be writing on religion for a major metropolitan daily.”

Our original article follows:

__________________________

You can write Cathleen Falsani at cfalsani@suntimes.com; or write a letter to the Sun Times (phone: 312-321-3000) at letters@suntimes.com.

In fact, my very first thought upon hearing of the Rev. Falwell’s passing was: Good.
     And I didn’t mean “good” in a oh-good-he’s-gone-home-to-be-with-the-Lord kind of way. I meant “good” as in “Ding-dong, the witch is dead.”
— Cathleen Falsani, “Sigh of Relief over Falwell’s Death,” May 18, Chicago Sun-Times

I wrote Cathleen Falsani to say how sad it is that a religion columnist would so cruelly denounce and defame a man shortly after his death. (More of that HERE.) The Religious Left — of which one could now safely say Falsani is a member — prides itself on its compassion, but when it comes down to it, they can be quite mean and guilty of the same harshness and “hate” of which they accuse others. It reminds me of the pro-abortion-rights liberals who fancy themselves as compassionate people who look out for the downtrodden (“the little guy”) — and yet can’t face their own hypocrisy in zealously defending the “right to choose” to kill society’s most helpless people: the unborn.

Sometimes Christian-identified writers and reporters go overboard in attacking Biblical traditionalists to show their media peers that they’re not a tool of the stereotypical “religious right.” Maybe that’s what happened here. Whether or not that’s the case, it’s tragic that Falsani, a Wheaton College grad, has sunk to this level. This is an ugly and tacky piece of writing that exposes the hypocrisy of self-righteous liberals and the disdain of the media for traditionalist Christian leaders. 

Like many in the Fourth Estate, Falsani needs sensitivity training and would surely benefit from a sabbatical at Falwell’s Liberty University. She should be removed as the Sun-Times’ religion columnist (at least she is no longer a religion reporter for the paper), but that won’t happen because most of the paper’s staff probably loved her column. Nothing like beating up on the ‘fundies,’ dead or alive, to burnish your credentials in the media. (Now, writing a fair column about a man or woman who has left homosexuality behind, through the power of the same Christ that Falsani professes to follow, that’s another story….)

Congratulations, Cathleen: you scored some more points with the Left, but you did so at the price of your own dignity, your Christian testimony, and to the detriment of your once noble profession.— Peter LaBarbera 

The following is excerpted by Media Research Council’s “NewsBusters” blog, by Tim Graham (emphasis added). You can read Graham’s entire piece by clicking HERE, and Falsani’s nasty column HERE):

Chicago Sun-Times Writer: Jerry Falwell Was a Spiritual Bully, Like Tony Soprano

By Tim Graham, Newsbusters.org, May 18, 2007

It might not be surprising for liberal blog commenters or talk-radio callers to denounce Rev. Jerry Falwell upon his death, but it’s a little more surprising when it comes to a professed Christian who’s religion columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times. Cathleen Falsani reflected on her first reaction about hearing Falwell was “relief” and compared him to gangster TV character Tony Soprano:

Knowing I didn’t have a deadline to meet that day, my first thoughts were not of what to say or write.

 

In fact, my very first thought upon hearing of the Rev. Falwell’s passing was: Good.

 

And I didn’t mean “good” in a oh-good-he’s-gone-home-to-be-with-the-Lord kind of way. I meant “good” as in “Ding-dong, the witch is dead.”

 

But that thought — good riddance, I suppose — was not meant to be cruel or malicious. [!]After all, the faith that the Rev. Falwell and I share teaches us that he was, at that moment, in a far better place, with Jesus in heaven, and not roasting on a spit in Hell’s kitchen.

 

By shrugging off his mortal coil, the Rev. Falwell had ceased to suffer the pain of humanity.

 

Still, I’m not particularly proud of my knee-jerk reaction. But there it is….

 

My initial reaction to the Rev. Falwell’s death was, and remains, relief — not unlike the ease I felt when a particularly nasty bully who used to spit at me on the playground and threaten to beat me up after school moved to another town.

 

The Rev. Falwell was a spiritual bully. He was the Tony Soprano to Pat Robertson’s Paulie Walnuts.

How on Earth can a religion columnist compare a televangelist to a malicious mob boss and killer? We could understand the typical Elmer Gantry comparisons, but Tony Soprano? Including Robertson on the list suggested clearly that was Falsani believes is that conservatism and orthodoxy are “bullying” and that liberalism and relativism brings true spirituality and harmony with God.

I am shocked — shocked — at the claims of Brian Camenker and our friends at Mass Resistance: are they saying that self-styled “queer” activists would actually use lies and deception, and manipulate the legal system, to bring down a conservative foe? Of course that’s what they’re saying — and Camenker knows the “gay” lobby like few others, since he — as the leading defender of pro-family values on the homosexual issue in Massachusetts — has been a target of its wrath. Remember, it’s all about ends justifying the means for so many homosexual activists, and it appears Cirignano is their latest victim.– Peter LaBarbera

MassResistance reports: 

Catholic activist Larry Cirignano arraigned in court on assault & battery, civil rights violation — completely phony charges against him by homosexual activists. Hearing on May 1. The justice system turned upside down.  ===

On Tuesday, April 11, Catholic activist Larry Cirignano was arraigned in a Worcester [Mass.] courthouse on charges of assault and battery, and civil rights violations. He will have his pre-trial hearing on May 1. Not only could Larry be convicted of these, but they are also exploring whether to also charge him with a hate crime.  This is being driven — with great energy — by local homosexual activists and the ACLU.

Words cannot express what an incredible, unbelievable fraud and injustice this is.  On Saturday morning, Dec. 16, 2006, Larry was helping run a pro-traditional marriage rally for VoteOnMarriage on the steps of Worcester City Hall. They had speakers, signs, and several dozen people who came to hear and see it. They had a permit to be there and made sure that police officers were present.

Homosexual activists also brought a sizeable group of people there. They gathered right in the same area. Their purpose was to scream and mingle and to disrupt the event in any way they could (see the video link HERE). At one point, one of them came right up and stood, with a sign, in front of the podium and started chanting, in order to disrupt it further. The police (who had already told them to back off) did nothing. So Larry walked up and walked her back into the crowd, away from the podium. When Larry was coming back, he heard screams. The woman (who it turns out is an ACLU Board Member) had dived to the ground and was claiming that Larry had pushed her!  But six eyewitnesses we talked to said that it was an act, an happened well after Larry had started walking the other way. Nevertheless, homosexual activists insisted that Larry had assaulted her and pushed her to the ground!

In the days following that incident, we talked to the Worcester police official responsible for deciding what to do. It became clear to us that the police were, shall we say, unbelievably sympathetic to the homosexual activists (“she had a right to free speech there”) and contempt for the pro-family community.

Now Larry’s being charged with a crime, a civil rights violation, and possible an additional hate crime!  The Orwellian absurdity of this is mind-numbing. The homosexual “community” has been celebrating and are determined to punish Larry as much as they can.

Here’s this week’s Worcester Telegram article on Wednesday’s arraignment. It’s completely slanted. It doesn’t mention that there are a MINIMUM of six close eye-witnesses (whom we’ve talked to) that say the alleged “attack” simply did not happen.
http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070412/NEWS/704120752/1008/NEWS02

Video of disgusting behavior by homosexual activists at the December 16 event
Here’s our current web page on this incident.   It includes a disgusting video of what the homosexual activists were doing during that event to disrupt it — besides the outrageous and phony stunt they pulled on Larry Cirignano. Unfortunately, this video does not have the actual incident, but it shows you what else was going on. We’ll be updating this page over the next week.
COMING UP SOON:  We have a copy of the only video taken during the actual incident. We will be posting that on the MassResistance website for you to see for yourself.

WE WILL KEEP YOU UP TO DATE ON THIS!

Below is the homosexual magazine OUT‘s list of its “Power 50” of influential homosexuals. OUT calls it “our first annual ranking of the homos who really make the world go round. These are queers you don’t want to mess with.the 50 most influential homosexuals in America.” (PC language lesson 101: they can use words like “homos” and “queers”; we can’t.)

We are intrigued by the fact that the same movement that once cried out for “privacy” and “to be left alone” feels free to publicly declare people’s homosexuality for them (Anderson Cooper, No. 2, and Jodie Foster, No. 43). On the other hand, if OUT is right, it might explain Cooper’s bias in his reporting on the homosexual issue: in a recent interview that the CNN host did with pro and con advocates on a “gay parenting” story, he blatantly favored the “gay” side in his questioning.

Regardless of whether Cooper practices homosexuality, as a professional he should be completely even-handed in his treatment of this controversial moral question. So, by the way, should the New York Times — Gay Mafia (No. 7) or no Gay Mafia. — Peter LaBarbera

1. David Geffen
2. Anderson Cooper
3. Ellen DeGeneres
4. Tim Gill
5. Barney Frank
6. Rosie O’Donnell
7. The New York Times Gay Mafia: Richard Berke, Ben Brantley, Frank Bruni, Stuart Elliott, Adam Nagourney, Stefano Tonchi, and Eric Wilson
8. Marc Jacobs
9. Andrew Tobias
10. Brian Graden
11. Jann Wenner
12. Andrew Sullivan
13. Suze Orman
14. Joe Solmonese
15. Fred Hochberg
16. Christine Quinn
17. Perez Hilton
18. Scott Rudin
19. John Aravosis
20. Sheila Kuehl
21. James B. Stewart
22. Nick Denton
23. Tom Ford
24. Nate Berkus
25. Adam Moss
26. Jim Nelson
27. Lorri L. Jean
28. Adam Rose
29. Annie Leibovitz
30. Simon Halls and Stephen Huvane
31. Bryan Lourd
32. Bryan Singer
33. Jonathan Burnham
34. Brian Swardstrom
35. Robert Greenblatt
36. Chi Chi LaRue
37. Dan Mathews
38. Neil Meron and Craig Zadan
39. Ingrid Sischy
40. Marc Cherry
41. Carolyn Strauss
42. Irshad Manji
43. Jodie Foster
44. Christine Vachon
45. André Leon Talley
46. Hilary Rosen
47. Matthew Marks
48. Benny Medina
49. Mitchell Gold
50. David Kuhn

“(A friend of mine recently told me about a guy he knew that was [HIV] positive
but would tell guys [potential sex partners] he was negative …
That guy was always surprised at how many people actually just took his word for it). Argh!”