Milo Yiannopolous dares to tell the truth about homosexuality



Don’t dismiss Milo Yiannopoulos.

He may be provocative, but he’s right. In his recent two-and-a-half-hour conversation with Tucker Carlson, Yiannopoulos dares to speak the truth about homosexuality.

Instead of a mechanical 'cause' such as genetics, it is more accurate to think of a set of factors that contribute to the development of persistent same-sex attraction.

It is a truth many are afraid to acknowledge, despite its firm grounding in scientific research. In fact, I found myself wondering, “Have they been eavesdropping at the Ruth Institute?”

'Born' fallacy

At the top of the list: Yiannopoulos explains that the “born gay” idea was invented as a marketing strategy. He accurately summarizes the strategy laid out in “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90’s.” Treat “sexual orientation” as if it were genetic, comparable to race.

Yiannopoulos rejects the “sexual orientation paradigm” or “essentialist paradigm.” He does not believe “sexual orientation” is an inborn trait that is an “essential” feature of a person’s personality.

And he is right.

Gay is not the “new black.” There is no gay gene. The twin studies are inconsistent with the idea of a genetic “cause” of “gay.” I outlined the evidence against the “born gay” idea in my report Refuting the Top 5 Gay Myths.

A trauma response

Although “gay” is a complex of thoughts, feelings, political commitments, and much more, when people say “gay,” they most likely mean “sexual arousal template.” We have been sold the idea that a “gay” man or a “lesbian” woman has an arousal template “oriented” exclusively toward people of the same sex.

The gay activists are really saying two things combined. First, people are born with a sexual arousal template preloaded into their brains. Second, this template cannot be changed.

Yiannopoulos takes direct aim at this package deal, when he says “[homosexuality] is a trauma response.” Trauma can shape the development of a person’s arousal pathways. He cited his own case. He had a mobster father, whom he did not want to emulate. As a teenager, he was sexually abused by a priest who was kind to him.

People are born with the potential to develop a sexual arousal template that is oriented toward the opposite sex. But sometimes, something happens to derail that normal developmental process.

People who self-describe as gay, lesbian, or bisexual typically have more difficult childhoods than others. They report more adverse childhood events, including a higher likelihood of childhood sexual abuse. Many in the psychology profession deny that there is a causal connection. But people who have lived the experience will tell you otherwise.

Including Yiannopoulos.

Must stay gay?

Instead of a mechanical “cause” such as genetics, it is more accurate to think of a set of factors that contribute to the development of persistent same-sex attraction.

Yiannopoulos listed some of those contributing causes: an absent or unattractive father figure, an overbearing mother, sexual abuse. No one factor always “causes” same-sex attraction in every person. At the Ruth Institute, we have interviewed numerous people who have Left Pride Behind who report some version of this story.

Yiannopoulos and Carlson talked about the bans on so-called “conversion therapy.” They were shocked that anyone would try to regulate conversations between a client and a therapist. "Why are you keeping people gay against their will?"

You can complain all day long about Yiannopoulos. But he is right. That is exactly what these laws are doing. We at the Ruth Institute ran a campaign in June called “Must Stay Gay Is NOT Okay!” Believe me: We did not run out of things to talk about!

They discussed the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case that will decide whether these bans violated the U.S. Constitution. The Ruth Institute submitted an amicus brief to the court in this case, called Chiles v. Salazar.

RELATED: A Christian looks back on Pride: 'I was in hell'

Photo by: Godong/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Finding real hope

Most importantly, Yiannopoulos gives hope to people who want more for themselves than a life shaped by an LGBT identity. Therapy can help, especially if you focus on healing the part of you that was wounded. The sexual feelings change in the process.

Finally, Yiannopoulos made no secret of his personal religious conversion. He has been touched by love, the ultimate love of Jesus Christ. Interviewees have told me some version of this story again and again. In fact, I experienced it myself. Same-sex attraction wasn’t my particular problem. But participation in the hookup culture, abortion, and contraception certainly were my problems. I needed the grace of the confessional, the Eucharist, and, no doubt, the prayers of many people who loved me more than I knew.

Come to think of it, maybe Yiannopoulos and Carlson weren’t really listening in on our conversations at the Ruth Institute after all. Maybe it's just that when people go searching for the truth, they end up in roughly the same place.

No one is born gay. No one has to stay gay. No matter what you have been through, gay is not the final word about your identity. Jesus has healed many people. He can heal you.

Milo Yiannopoulos is right.

God doesn't make anyone gay: The case against banning 'conversion therapy'



In response to to a recent Supreme Court case, last week Fr. James Martin posted on X that so-called “conversion therapy” should be banned.

That’s not compassion. That’s censorship dressed up as virtue. And as a Catholic priest, he should know better.

When a young man says, 'I want help living chastely,' telling him his request is unrealistic and maybe even illegal — that’s cruelty.

This case, Chiles v. Salazar, isn’t forcing anyone to change. It’s about the freedom of young people, their parents, and counselors to even talk about faith, identity, and healing.

Refuting 'born this way'

Early this summer, my Ruth Institute colleague Fr. Paul Sullins and I submitted an amicus brief to the court concerning the Chiles case. Fr. Sullins is a former sociology professor at Catholic University of America. I am a former economics professor at Yale University. In our brief, we summarized research on sexual orientation and on change therapy.

Fr. James Martin’s core argument actually comes at the end of his post, where he says:

“Like it or not, understand it or not, this is how God made them. Accepting the way God made them is part of the 'respect, compassion and sensitivity' that the Catechism calls for.”

Notice that he treats the “born this way” idea as something so obvious that it doesn’t even need to be defended. However, this is factually incorrect.

In 2019, a massive study of the human genome clearly showed there is no “gay gene.” The genetic contribution to self-identification as “gay” is roughly the same as a genetic contribution to other complex behavioral systems, such as the tendency to alcoholism or other kinds of addictions.

Even before 2019, studies of identical twins cast serious doubt on the claim that people are born gay. These studies examine the concordance between twins. If it were really true that "gay is the new black," then concordance between twins should be 100%. The actual number is closer to 30%.

As a matter of fact, even the American Psychological Association admits:

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

Bad science, bad theology

The APA is correct when it says that many possible factors contribute to the development of persistent same-sex attraction or a gay identity. A set of contributing factors is not at all the same as one cause, as if one and only one thing were in play. The Ruth Institute’s report “Refuting the Top 5 Gay Myths” explains this in more detail. You can obtain this report at no charge by subscribing to our newsletter.

For now, let us state plainly: The claim that “this is how God made them” is bad science. It is certainly bad theology, as Fr. Martin ought to know. God doesn’t make anybody gay.

And God certainly doesn’t put anybody in the “wrong body.” That idea is physical nonsense and metaphysical nonsense. Your body is you!

Fr. Martin says there’s “no evidence” that counseling like this helps. No evidence? Seriously? That’s simply false.

RELATED: ‘Must Stay Gay’ laws face their overdue reckoning

Photo by Dendron via Getty Images

Flawed 'evidence'

Our own research at the Ruth Institute shows that talk therapy — not shock therapy or any other aversive techniques, but the talk therapy that is really at stake in this case — has helped many people find peace and stability in the face of unwanted same-sex attraction.

And the so-called “evidence” used to ban therapy that helps people reduce their feelings of unwanted same-sex attraction? There are a lot of problems with those studies, which we cover thoroughly in our amicus brief.

The most important objection is that these studies do not take account of pre-counseling distress. We found evidence that the people who are the most distressed and the most suicidal are also the most likely to seek therapy. If you correlate “lifetime suicide attempts” with “did you ever go for therapy,” some of the people were suicidal before they ever went to a counselor. It is not correct to blame the counseling for something that happened before the counseling took place!

Fr. Sullins found that taking account of the before and after basically obliterated the results of one of the most commonly cited studies that supposedly shows that “conversion therapy causes suicide.”

The truth will set you free

Besides, the claim that there is “no evidence” is a recklessly strong one. What about all the people who have Left Pride Behind, some with the help of therapy, some without? Each one of them counters the claim that “no one can change” and “therapy never works.” Even a single counter-example is enough to disprove these strong claims. And at the Ruth Institute, we’ve got a lot of cases! Don’t their stories deserve to be heard? These are real people whose stories are being systematically silenced in the public square.

I’ve listened to many of these stories. My friends who have Left Pride Behind consistently tell me that what they needed was people to walk with them, in genuine compassion.

Fr. Martin says, “It’s not a Christian value to do harm.” I agree.

But denying someone the freedom to live by his or her faith is harm.

When a young man says, “I want help living chastely,” telling him his request is unrealistic and maybe even illegal — that’s cruelty. My friends tell me how much they valued their friends and family members who stood by them as they struggled with temptation or with relapses or with discouragement. They cherish those friends as true brothers and sisters in Christ

Christian love always points to truth. The Ruth Institute stands for the freedom to heal — the freedom to live your faith fully, even when it’s unpopular or challenging.

The Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether the state can control what you’re allowed to say in the privacy of a counseling room. Let us hope the justices opt for freedom of speech and religion. That’s something every Catholic — including priests — should defend.

I invite Fr. Martin, and anyone who shares his views, to look again at the gospel and the science. Jesus never banned the truth — because truth sets us free.

The Problem With Conversion Therapy Bans

In September 2024, a coalition of 20 state attorneys general filed an amicus brief in United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court case that upheld Tennessee's ban on pediatric gender medicine. The law, SB1, made it a crime to prescribe puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to minors for the purpose of treating gender dysphoria, and the officials, all from blue states, described it as a stark departure from the norms of medical regulation, accusing Tennessee of second-guessing the judgment of health care professionals.

The post The Problem With Conversion Therapy Bans appeared first on .

‘Must Stay Gay’ laws face their overdue reckoning



The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday in Chiles v. Salazar, a case that could reshape counseling freedom across America. The law at issue is one of several so-called “conversion therapy bans” that restrict what therapists may say to their clients.

The Ruth Institute calls them what they are: “Must Stay Gay” laws.

The fight for counseling freedom isn’t about forcing anyone to change. It’s about defending every person’s right to seek help aligned with their own beliefs and goals.

These laws silence counselors and harm families, especially young people struggling with trauma, anxiety, and sexual confusion. The question before the court is simple: Does the First Amendment allow a state to dictate which viewpoints a licensed therapist may express?

A strong signal from the court

The central issue in Chiles is viewpoint discrimination. Colorado’s law allows therapists to affirm a child’s same-sex attraction or gender confusion — but forbids them from helping a client resist or change those feelings.

Justice Samuel Alito captured the absurdity in one hypothetical, which I paraphrase (the whole argument is here):

An adolescent male comes to a licensed therapist; he feels uneasy and guilty about feeling attracted to other boys. He asks the therapist to help him feel better as a gay man. Colorado law permits this. Another adolescent male goes to a licensed therapist and asks him to help him feel less attracted to other boys. Colorado law forbids this.

That’s government picking sides in a moral debate, not equality under the law.

When pressed, Colorado’s attorney stumbled badly. Alito then asked whether “medical consensus” has ever been wrong. She hesitated, and he reminded her of Buck v. Bell,the notorious 1927 decision that upheld forced sterilization based on “progressive” science. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes expressed the common progressive opinion at the time: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

In closing, Alliance Defending Freedom attorney James Campbell, who represents therapist Kaley Chiles, delivered the knockout line:

The state of Colorado allows a 12-year-old girl to seek counseling to affirm her so-called gender identity as a boy without parental consent — but forbids her, even with her parents, from seeking help to accept herself as female.

That’s blatant viewpoint discrimination. On this point, the justices seemed receptive.

Junk science and the ‘born this way’ myth

The state also claimed that no one has ever changed their sexual attractions — a claim as false as it is arrogant. One counterexample disproves it, and there are thousands. Our amicus brief cites studies and testimonies from men and women who experienced real change, often through talk therapy.

Colorado’s attorney dug herself in deeper, asserting that all theories linking abuse or family dynamics to sexual identity have been “debunked.” They haven’t. The research she relies on doesn’t distinguish between minors and adults, licensed and unlicensed therapists, or talk therapy and coercive “aversion” practices.

That’s ideology, not science. And the justices noticed.

RELATED: Christian counselors fight for freedom of speech before the Supreme Court

Photo by Sakorn Sukkasemsakorn via Getty Images

The state’s lawyer also leaned on the claim that being gay is innate and immutable. She presented no evidence for that assertion, only the assumption that it must be true. But twin and genetic studies contradict it. Many people once identified as LGBT and no longer do. They exist, they matter, and they expose the lie behind the “born this way” narrative.

What comes next

The court offered no hints about how it will rule on the immutability question. But the justices heard enough to know that Colorado’s law enforces one approved orthodoxy and punishes dissent. That’s unconstitutional — and morally indefensible.

The fight for counseling freedom isn’t about forcing anyone to change. It’s about defending every person’s right to seek help aligned with their own beliefs and goals.

Here at the Ruth Institute, we’ll keep pressing the truth: “Must Stay Gay” is not OK.

Christian counselors fight for freedom of speech before the Supreme Court



This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

RELATED: Free speech is a core American value

stellalevi via iStock/Getty Images

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

SCOTUS decides: Should conversion therapy be ILLEGAL?



In 2019, a law was passed in Colorado that banned counselors from attempting to change a minor client’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including behaviors or gender expressions. Effectively, they banned conversion therapy.

However, there is an exception.

“The counselor can offer assistance to a person undergoing gender transition. So, you can help them one direction, you just can’t help them the other direction,” Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck explains on “The Glenn Beck Program.”

And one woman is taking on the law, arguing that her free speech is being violated.

Kaley Chiles is a licensed counselor and Christian out of Colorado Springs who specializes in addiction, trauma, sexuality, gender dysphoria, and other mental health concerns. Her clients are those seeking religiously informed care that aligns with biblical teachings, especially on sexuality and gender.


Prior to 2019, Chiles was fine. She counseled clients, including minors, and helped many with gender dysphoria.

Now, her lawsuit has gone all the way to the Supreme Court.

“That’s the court case that the Supreme Court heard yesterday. … Is counseling freedom of speech? Can I not counsel based on my religious dictates? Colorado says no. This is going to be a huge case,” Glenn says.

“I believe that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God, and the family is central to the Creator’s plan for eternal destiny of his children. ... I believe all human beings, male and female, are created in the image of God,” he continues.

“We have people in black robes deciding whether that can be said by me, by you, by a counselor, by a priest. In Colorado today, that counselor cannot sit down with that minor and say what I just said. It’s against the law in Colorado,” he says. “Is that the freedom that the left is preaching for?”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

‘Blatant Viewpoint Discrimination’: Alito Slams Colorado For Telling Therapists They Can’t Affirm Kids’ Natural Sex

Associate Justice Samuel Alito exposed the absurdity of a Colorado law prohibiting so-called “conversion therapy” for minors during a high-profile case before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. The moment came during oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case focused on a legal challenge brought by Colorado resident Kaley Chiles. A licensed therapist who provides […]

Gorsuch, Barrett Blast Colorado’s Double Standard On Talk Therapy For Kids With Gender Dysphoria

Under Colorado's argument, a state could "forbid a regulated licensed professional from affirming homosexuality if that were consistent with the then-prevailing 'standard of care.'"