Scans see 'gay brain differences'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nickkname
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nickkname

Guest
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm

Everyone, let me remind you of one thing about science: It’s not about truthes, it’s about facts. The facts which science discovers can be overturned. (For example, the fact of evolution would be overturned if we ever found a human being who lived at the same time as the dinosaurs). So just because science says something dosen’t mean it’s an absolute truth; it’s just a fact that can be overturned by a newly discovered fact. Which means that the argument over whether or not gays are born gay is far from over.
 
Also, even if homosexuality is something that one is born with, it would not change the truth of the Church’s teaching on the subject one bit. After all, we all have crosses to bear.
 
Yes! God will separate the goats from the sheep and all homophobes will be revealed for what they truly are! You cannot make good decisions without good information. God is always on the side of those who seek truth, not those who assume they know everything. The hell you have created for me is the one that you will rot in.
 
Tormentd said:
Yes! God will separate the goats from the sheep and all homophobes will be revealed for what they truly are! You cannot make good decisions without good information. God is always on the side of those who seek truth, not those who assume they know everything. The hell you have created for me is the one that you will rot in.
Click to expand...
I find your post confusing. Are you saying that you accept the Church’s teachings on homosexuality or that you don’t?

Personally, I am quite certain that I don’t know everything. Hence I follow the Church. And on this subject the Catechism is quite clear, including the dignity of homosexuals as persons as well as the importance of their not engaging in homosexual practices.
 
there is a huge difference between prenatal influences and a genetic basis for a disorder. for instance it has been hypothesized and studied in rodents (hampsters I think) that exposure to female hormones of the mother during pregnancy, which varies according to the position of each member of the litter within the uterus, can affect sexual behavior. There are theories about effects of environmental toxins on the developing fetus as well.

That is not the same as saying the trait is linked to a specific gene. That kind of study would require taking DNA from a sample of self-professed gays and an equal sample of heterosexuals, accounting for and eliminating other factors, and examining the genes, don’t know if our technology makes this type of study cost effective yet.

But until we have that kind of research no one can claim a genetic link. Still less can one say “I was born this way so God made me this way”. That would also mean “I was born with no arms because my mother took a dangerous drug in pregnancy, so God made me this way.”

Science seldom deals in absolutes, which is why there are very few natural phenomena labeled as laws, such as gravity. Science deals in making the best explanations based on available data, and changes the explanation when new data is found. God however does not change, nor does his purpose in creating humans, or individuals.
 
puzzleannie said:
there is a huge difference between prenatal influences and a genetic basis for a disorder. for instance it has been hypothesized and studied in rodents (hampsters I think) that exposure to female hormones of the mother during pregnancy, which varies according to the position of each member of the litter within the uterus, can affect sexual behavior. There are theories about effects of environmental toxins on the developing fetus as well.

That is not the same as saying the trait is linked to a specific gene. That kind of study would require taking DNA from a sample of self-professed gays and an equal sample of heterosexuals, accounting for and eliminating other factors, and examining the genes, don’t know if our technology makes this type of study cost effective yet.

But until we have that kind of research no one can claim a genetic link. Still less can one say “I was born this way so God made me this way”. That would also mean “I was born with no arms because my mother took a dangerous drug in pregnancy, so God made me this way.”

Science seldom deals in absolutes, which is why there are very few natural phenomena labeled as laws, such as gravity. Science deals in making the best explanations based on available data, and changes the explanation when new data is found. God however does not change, nor does his purpose in creating humans, or individuals.
Click to expand...
What Puzzleannie, said.

This is just another attempt by those with the agenda mentality to justify this twisted logic.
  1. Their is no gay gene because their is no transport mechanism for gay genes, from one generation to the next.
  2. What articles like this do is try and grasp for straws using statistics. They will try and find anything that is remotely statistical, in a sub category and profess it as the new absolute scientific fact or evidence. It simple is not their. These are all attempts grasping at statistical straws.
 
Here’s a simple way to test the idea:

Ask yourself; “did I ever consider the alternatives with regard to sexual orientation, and make a decision which one I wanted to be?”

Whether you’re a homosexual or a heterosexual, or whatever is in between, did you ever consider being any of the others, and decide that you wanted to be what you are?

I cannot ever remember deciding to be a heterosexual. It just happened. And although I’ve asked a lot of people, only one (bisexual) actually remembered choosing.
 
Here’s another simple way to test the idea:

Let’s create a homosexual country or even a state. Let’s make the entire country/state with unbridled homosexuality and stand back and watch what happens. Wouldn’t gay and lesbian supporters be for that, we could all, live and let live, right. The families could raise their children without ever hearing about homosexuals and the homosexuals would not be held back or suppressed by the families. After a decade or two what do you think would happen? They wouldn’t want to impose their will on our freedom to think right? That would be imperialism, huh.

Gays and lesbians are only 2-3% of the total population and are of no real consequence to the daily life of 96% of the others, (if we consider the families of the homosexuals). The cold hard truth is the only reason we even hear about this tiny minority so much is that conservatives sold their business interest in the older media establishments years ago and the liberals have control of these old name “megaphones”.

James 4:7-8 “So submit yourselves to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you of two minds.”
 
All of us have free will and we can choose whether or not to participate in sexual behavior at any time, and with anyone. Yes, some people are tempted by homosexual attractions, just like some people are tempted by heterosexual attractions. But, with God’s grace, we can choose to not act on those temptations. All sexual behavior outside of marriage between a husband and his wife is wrong. As the Church teaches, both the unitive and procreative aspects can only be found in marriage between a man and a woman.
 
The church teaches that homosexual orientation is not sinful per se. And the church teaches infallibly. The Church is not wrong in her teaching. Is she absolutely right? Given what we know, I’d say yes, but the Church herself says that it must always examine its teaching in light of advancing knowledge and revelation. So, is she absolutely right in the final analysis, maybe, maybe not. And it is the church herself that teaches us that true religion and true science are never in conflict.

Homosexuals have proportionally higher rates of mental illness and suicide as a group. So why would someone choose a lifestyle that is so ostracized and scorned by the mainstream?

As a strictly heterosexual male, I cannot understand (and I’m sure most other heterosexual men would agree) for the life of me, why anyone would willingly and happily choose such a lifestyle. There has to be some “wires crossed” somewhere. Science is trying to find those “wires”. And maybe uncross them. If they exist.

It is the obligation of science to attempt to answer those questions. And the answers aren’t going to change any church positions. So why not let science do its job and forgo the condemnation or rebuttal till all the facts are known?

The only question I have about the cited study is how does it explain the very feminine lesbian (lipstick lesbians) and the very masculine male who does not fit the stereotype (queen, swishy, etc.?) Science needs to keep looking, and I think we need to pull back and let science do its job.
 
The_Barbarian said:
Here’s a simple way to test the idea:

Ask yourself; “did I ever consider the alternatives with regard to sexual orientation, and make a decision which one I wanted to be?”

Whether you’re a homosexual or a heterosexual, or whatever is in between, did you ever consider being any of the others, and decide that you wanted to be what you are?

I cannot ever remember deciding to be a heterosexual. It just happened. And although I’ve asked a lot of people, only one (bisexual) actually remembered choosing.
Click to expand...
Unless one is raped they make a choice everytime they engage in sex.
 
I see sexuality as a billiard table and each person as a ball. The various deviations are the side pockets. We are born somewhere on the table, some near the middle, some near the sides. Life stresses shake the table and sometimes shake us into the nearest pocket. But we have free will and can cling to the edge of the table and refuse to fall in. What we need to research is a way of keeping others from falling into the pockets.
 
From the Vatican:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html

Instruction:
Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations
with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies
in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders

"Deep-seated homosexual tendencies, which are found in a number of men and women, are also objectively disordered and, for those same people, often constitute a trial. Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfil God’s will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter[8].

In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question[9], cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture”[10].

Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies."
 
I’ll share something very personal that I haven’t shared with others before. My parents separated and later divorced when I was in grade school. It wasn’t pleasant at all and I still remember the hostilities that took place. Being young and not able to understand things like I can now as an adult, I saw things pretty much from my mother’s perspective alone. I hated my dad and I didn’t have anything to do with him for many years. But I also knew deep inside that it was wrong for me to hate him. I ended up hating myself and being depressed for a long time. When I was around 12 or 13, I began being attracted to certain male friends. This continued on into my late high school years. I remember being tempted to act on my feelings, but I knew that it would be wrong to do so. Luckily for me, my mother re-married when I was still in high school. My step-father was a wonderful man who filled a void in my life at just the right time. He provided the fatherly support to me that I had been lacking and seeking subconsciously. I began having feelings for the opposite sex, and as you can tell by my forum name, I am now a happy and blessed father. But I don’t doubt for a minute that had I gave in to those temptations when I was younger, my life would be much different now. So I wholeheartedly agree that sexual orientation is not freely chosen in most cases. But choosing to act on those feelings is always a matter of free will. Finally, my father and I did reconcile many years later and my prayer is that both he and my step-father are now in Heaven.
 
Steeltemplar said:
Also, even if homosexuality is something that one is born with, it would not change the truth of the Church’s teaching on the subject one bit. After all, we all have crosses to bear.
Click to expand...
Your’re right! The “truth” of the Church’s teaching would still be a lie! A biased, unscriptural, man-made lie! And if “homosexuality is something that one is born with”, it certainly would send “christians” back to the drawing board to concoct a new method for furthering their inhumane propaganda!
 
Father_of_8 said:
So I wholeheartedly agree that sexual orientation is not freely chosen in most cases. But choosing to act on those feelings is always a matter of free will.
Click to expand...
So why didn’t you choose celibacy instead of marriage? Don’t you think you were being called to singleness?
 
Let’s get back on track.
First, if there were a genetic link to homosexuality, it would have been found and studied to death by now. The silence is deafening.
Are there twin studies? Identical twins separated at or near birth and reared in different circumstances, then compared in adulthood.
Of course there are. The silence is deafening.
Same sex attraction is apparently a result of some difficulty in separation or transition - mom to dad - in upbringing or some variation on that theme.
So the question is what you do with it. We have free will.
The important point is that we cannot allow the deviant actions of a few and skewed plitical views by many radicals destroy society, and those who would argue with the above statement, please give me credible historical evidence of any society based on homosexual relations that succeeded.
 
Father_of_9 said:
All of us have free will and we can choose whether or not to participate in sexual behavior at any time, and with anyone. Yes, some people are tempted by homosexual attractions, just like some people are tempted by heterosexual attractions. But, with God’s grace, we can choose to not act on those temptations. All sexual behavior outside of marriage between a husband and his wife is wrong.
Click to expand...
HELLO!!! These statements are the ultimate proof that you just don’t get it! If you had said this to my face, my gut reaction would have been to rip you to pieces both emotionally and physically. Because in a sense, that’s exactly what your post above does to me!

You actually have the AUDICITY to compare temptations between a married homosexual and a single homosexual. What is wrong with you?! Do you not realize that the married hetrosexual STILL HAS A PARTNER TO CALL THEIR OWN?!! The homosexual however, HAS NO ONE!! THERE IS NO COMPARISON!! NONE!

If you want to speak of heterosexuals forgoing marriage, even when the desire is strong, even when a partner is found, even if there is mutual attraction, and even when they are mutually in love, then you can talk about a comparison. Until then there is none.

Your statement above is anything but fair and it’s certainly anything but loving. It’s inhumane! And I and others are sick and tired of it!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top