Another Logical American—A Journalist!—Converts to Conservatism

March 07, 2017

WRITER

What could more difficult than coming out as a gay man? Easy. Coming out as a conservative gay man.

Chadwick Moore, a journalist who recently published an article in the New York Post titled, "I'm a gay New Yorker, and I'm coming out as a conservative," says it's the hardest thing he's ever done.

Moore joined The Glenn Beck Program to talk about his conversion to conservatism.

"I've had conservative-leaning Libertarian values for a long time, and they've been growing. And even just a couple years ago, you know, I could get into political discussions with people, and it would be very clear that I have these views. And they might not like it, and they might yell and storm out, but you could still mostly have a debate. And now that is not the case," Moore said.

Moore explained it's not his politics that have changed, but rather the line has shifted beneath his feet.

"It's moved me to the right," he said.

Glenn welcomed the opportunity to close ranks with another American using reason and logic over emotion.

"This is happening," Glenn said. "If we don't open arms [to] those who feel like he does --- left or right --- if we don't close ranks and open arms, right now . . . we have a chance to gather so many people, so many people.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Chadwick Moore, a lifelong liberal and journalist who has now written this line in his op-ed: When I was growing up in the Midwest, coming out to my family at the age of 15 was one of the hardest things I've ever done. Today, it's just as nerve-racking to come out to all of New York as a conservative.

Chadwick, welcome to the program. May I call you Chad, or what do you prefer? Chadwick?

CHADWICK: You can call me anything you would like, Glenn.

GLENN: I know. What do you prefer though? Do you prefer Chadwick?

CHADWICK: Most people call me -- yeah, Chadwick is fine, yeah.

GLENN: So, Chadwick, is this harder than -- are the consequences greater than when you came out, or the same, or less?

CHADWICK: The consequences are definitely greater. You know, when I came out as a teenager, of course, it was scary for all the reasons that everyone hears about. You're worried about being bullied. Worried about your family rejecting you. But I had at that time sort of -- you know, I had a fake ID. I was going out to gay bars. I sort of -- I already had the sort of network of friends, gay friends that I had made, or at least accepting friends who I could sort of secretly tell.

This -- I didn't know -- I didn't have any conservative friends. I didn't know anyone, and I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, which is the epicenter of New York City of sort of the social justice, identity politics brigade.

GLENN: Holy cow.

CHADWICK: Yeah. And -- and so I had -- I was going in completely blind. As we know that coming out as a conservative, you face unemployment discrimination, absolutely, especially in industries like media, which I'm in. We feel this violence in the street. We see people being assaulted and yelled at for no reason. So it was definitely -- definitely more nerve-racking --

GLENN: So, Chadwick, I have a friend who is on the other side of the aisle. I have several of them. And one of them was telling me just the other day that they don't know how to even speak sometimes to their own friends. And they're rock solid liberal. They don't know how to speak to some of their own friends because things are so crazy. And I think it's this way on the right too. That if you're not lockstep against Donald Trump, if you're in a liberal circle, you're -- you're an enemy.

CHADWICK: Oh. 100 percent, yes. You know, I've had conservative-leaning Libertarian values for a long time. And they've been growing. And even just a couple years ago, you know, I could get into political discussions with people, and it would be very clear that I have these views. And they might not like it, and they might yell and storm out. But you could still mostly have a debate. And now that is not the case.

And especially over the last year, if I would start to challenge my friends' political ideas and start to present the other side, you were an enemy. And the next time that person saw you, they would not talk to you.

So it's definitely changed. You know, I'd like to say that my politics has not changed. The line has moved beneath my feet. It's moved me to the right.

GLENN: So what is it -- was it Donald Trump that moved you there? How do you define conservative? Because I'm not sure how to define that anymore.

CHADWICK: Great point. I define -- you know, lots of people can disagree with me on this. I find conservative to be a very useful term, a very useful umbrella term for the sort of diverse political thought that's on the right. So the evangelical Christians, the Tea Partiers, the establishment Republicans, and then people more like me who are the Libertarian classical liberals.

So that's how I use the term "conservative." I find that useful.

Donald Trump was definitely a huge -- you know, I feel like his rise -- and a lot of people who identify more Libertarian on the right, their visibility, has really shifted the borders of conservatism and been more welcoming to people like myself who are disaffected liberals who are against the leftists.

And Donald Trump has really sort of -- you know, no longer is this base of conservatism, these kind of Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan types, who I would have just as little in common with I think as I do Hillary Clinton, even though I've held my nose and ticked her box last November.

GLENN: So, Chadwick, so we're probably then in the same category of conservative. I don't relate to the big government people at all. And I want to leave people alone. I was -- you know, I didn't have a problem with gay marriage, you know, long before Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. I just don't think the government has a place in anybody's marriage, left, right, gay, straight -- it doesn't matter. They just don't have a place there.

And so you're more of a Libertarian small government, leave people alone, kind of constitutionalist?

CHADWICK: Absolutely. Yes. Firm, staunch believer in first, Second Amendment. Absolute constitutionalist.

GLENN: Did you have a problem with the Obama administration on the First Amendment?

CHADWICK: You know, they didn't really say anything. With the press, you know, everyone likes to think that Trump is this authoritarian person. But, you know, Obama was going after journalists left and right.

PAT: Uh-huh.

CHADWICK: And, you know, the Democrats are sort of -- his administration, you know, they didn't really get much done. But the sort of liberal base then under his administration seems to have been galvanized in this radical, awful way. And the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton and the DNC have never called them out or try to reprimand them. They've just let them run wild.

So I think in that sense, I think Obama -- yeah, he never tried to stop this, this radical push to the left that his followers have undergone.

GLENN: Talking to Chadwick Moore. He's a journalist out of New York. He was known as a liberal. He's now a conservative. A Libertarian, small government conservative, constitutionalist.

The -- I have said this to my inner circle that I have met with a bunch of people that have, in fact, given lots of money to the Democratic Party who have now woken up for the first time to the fact that, wait a minute, my party is really pretty extreme. They're embracing this authoritarian kind of idea. And they rejected that serious Marxists -- and people who really didn't like the Constitution or didn't like the free market system. You know, had a real serious place at the table. They knew they were in the party. But they didn't have a real serious place at the table.

And they've opened their eyes. Now, many of them haven't been strong enough as you are now. But they have told me behind the scenes, "I'm not with the Democrats either." Do you think there is -- that you're alone. Or do you think that there's a lot of people like this, that are feeling the way you did?

CHADWICK: Oh, Glenn, I know for a fact that there are a lot of people. And the evidence is in my inbox. I've gotten thousands of messages from people since that post ran. And I would say legitimately 50 percent of those messages are conservatives from all walks of life, evangelicals to Libertarians, the other half I would say are disaffected Democrats who have been saying to me, I feel the exact same way you do. I'm scared to come out. I don't agree with this. I consider myself a moderate, but there's no place for me in the party anymore. I'm scared if I speak up, I'll lose my job. That's a big thing. I'll lose clients. You know, I'm an independent contractor. And I don't know what to do. And people have said, like, thank you for being a vessel for this voice of reason. You know, especially coming from the left.

And what you said about -- it's like President Reagan said, if fascism comes to America, it will be in the guise of liberalism. You know, it will be private ownership with absolute government control.

GLENN: Yeah. How do we grow this? Because, Chadwick, this is something that I have been, you know, working towards for a while and felt really alone for a long time, that there would be strange bedfellows, that we're not going to agree on everything, and we're going to come from the left and the right. And we're just going to stand for basic principles. And people will say, what principles would we have in common? We could start with just the Bill of Rights. And if you could give me nine out of the ten of the Bill of Rights, I think we have enough to build strong coalitions. And I don't think it's that hard.

How do we empower the people on both sides that are afraid to come out? Because I've seen it on both sides. It's -- it's bad.

CHADWICK: Yeah. And that is an excellent question and an excellent point. I agree with you that -- that the strongest weapon we have is the Bill of Rights. It is the Constitution.

You know, a few months ago, you know, I was thinking, this country is either on the verge of a bloody civil war or a really radical wonderful political enlightenment and it looks like staunch constitutionalism. And I think that's what you see happening. I think there are tons of people like me, who -- you know, the sort of liberal I was, was what this term -- a lot of people are using now called the "classical liberal," which is a constitutionalist. It's someone who supports free people, free markets, free speech, free thought. And I think that is -- nobody disagrees with that. So I think that you're right, that that is the greatest weapon we have.

And the sort of authoritarian element on the left, I still believe, is so small and so fringe. But they're so violent. And their biggest weapon is their -- is their, you know, racist homophobic Nazi bigot. That's all they can say because they have no argument. And nobody wants to be called of those things. So if you challenge them, they throw those words at you. Shut up! And that's why the media doesn't challenge them because the media doesn't want to be boycotted. They don't want to be this and that. I think most people in the media are terrified of these people too. But I think there are signs that that's no longer working. People see that Donald Trump isn't, you know, a white supremacist. So I think it's beginning to crack. And I think you're right that the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, is the greatest weapon to unite the most patriotic and fair-minded people in this country. Because our country, if you look at Europe, how authoritarian the culture is becoming in Europe, we really are the last hope for the sort of great idea of free people and free markets and individual responsibility.

GLENN: How do you argue with people who will say this to a Republican? They said it under George Bush. And they will say it again because of Donald Trump. And they say it to people like you, who voted for Barack Obama, assuming that you did, voting for Barack Obama, supported or was relatively quiet during Barack Obama. What do you say to those people that say, "Well, where were you as a staunch constitutionalist when X, Y, or Z were happening?" And you could say that to both sides. How do we tell people, "The past is the past, and I'm sincere in standing with the Constitution?"

CHADWICK: That's another great question. Right. So I was thinking about this just the other day. You know, when Obama was president, it was very much like, I'm just going to close my eyes and let him take the wheel. I think a lot -- you know, if I just speak of my own personal experience, people are allowed to make mistakes. I didn't know any better. And also, at the time, I just felt I didn't have -- it's strange because I've been on both sides now. I didn't feel I had a choice. Especially when the religious right was in control of the Republican Party, and as a gay person -- and the sort of very anti-gay, non-Libertarian rules they were trying to enforce, you just feel like you didn't have a choice. So you were like, "Well, these are my people. I'm a Democrat. I have to be a Democrat."

And this is what we were saying earlier about the sort of lines being changed. And Donald Trump -- Donald Trump is the first president to take office being for gay rights, Democrat or Republican.

And so it's -- now that the culture has shifted so rapidly, I think a lot of people don't feel like they have to find blindly with their party affiliation because the other side is evil. Because they're just being told that.

So I think that most people in this country have just been falling into party lines. But now there's such an anti-establishment vigor amongst the people in this country, on the left too.

That's why Bernie would have been the nominee. He was a nationalist. He was anti-establishment. He would have been the nominee if the Democratic Party had not colluded against him and all these other things. And the superdelegates and all this other stuff. So I think most people are on our side. And it's just the misbehavior of the establishment that's finally reached a breaking point where people can actually come together.

GLENN: Chadwick, I'd love to talk to you some more. I think you're fascinating and extraordinarily brave. Extraordinarily brave.

CHADWICK: Thank you.

GLENN: And congratulations on sticking to your principles and come what may. It's -- it's a rare thing.

CHADWICK: The exact same to you, Glenn. Great admirer of yours.

GLENN: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. We'll talk again. Thank you.

STU: It's interesting to hear that --

GLENN: This is happening. I'm telling you, if we -- if we walk together, if we don't open arms, those who feel like he does, left or right, if we don't close ranks and open arms, right now, we have a chance to gather so many people, so many people.

STU: I really like the -- his answer to, well, wait a minute. What about when this side did this and this side did this? Well, you know, maybe I made a mistake. I didn't have all the information, and now I do.

GLENN: I really like him a lot.

STU: That sort of attitude is so missing from our society that you can admit that, you know what, maybe I had the wrong perspective back then, and now I have the right one.

GLENN: Yeah, like him a lot.

STU: Yeah.

Breaking point: Will America stand up to the mob?

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

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.

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.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

Glenn's Show Prep