Scans see 'gay brain differences'

[minkymurph]

Just hang on and you might be able to get a pill soon

Do you think they will ever invent a pill which prevents people from sinning full stop?

 

[Gaurdian]

I was thinking about how cocaine use before, during or after delivery in mice caused the infant mice to have sexual confusion as they went through adolescence.

With a 30% cesearan rate in the U.S. and just about every single delivery having at least one form of analgesic, if not several, I wonder what affect this has on the newborn’s chemical balance and brain development.

I wonder, if scientists did conclude that homosexual attraction was due to an environmental factor such as the mother snorting coke, saddle blocks, artificial hormones in the water, antibiotics in meat, etc, do you think some people would sue?

What Hasikelee, said. This could be the biggest smoking gun.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

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.

There may be some useful place in human society (via human species DNA [d’uh!]) for same-sex-attracted persons.

I have no idea what that benefit might be, but there is a HUGE difference between “hardwired” SSA and “hardwired” Gotta-do-homosexual-acts!

Even if there IS a hardwiring of SSA, it doesn’t justify homosexual acts, or counter the truth to their being the harmful acts they are, objectively, to human society.

Birth defects tend to promote compassion for the afflicted in human societies (or the direct opposite if in an “evil” society), and that is at least ONE possible good that such an “allowance” by God might provide.

 

[Kevin42]

Just hang on and you might be able to get a pill soon

While that would be all well and good, I have actually become very at peace (and dare I say happy?) with the idea of a life of celibacy, and I doubt I would give that up now. Glory to God!

 

[cyberwolf001]

Do you think they will ever invent a pill which prevents people from sinning full stop?

It’s called the Catholic Church, best we got for healing us from sin.

(Fine I give up being in denial me ish Catholic)

 

[Crow]

If science found a cure for homosexuality and made it available, would it be ethical?

And if such a cure was available, why would someone object to taking the cure?

If science could likewise offer a ‘gay-pill’ and make a heterosexual a homosexual, why would someone consider such change? What possible advantage could there be?

 

[jman507]

If science found a cure for homosexuality and made it available, would it be ethical?

And if such a cure was available, why would someone object to taking the cure?

If science could likewise offer a ‘gay-pill’ and make a heterosexual a homosexual, why would someone consider such change? What possible advantage could there be?

If that was the case, it would depend on your outlook on homosexuality. From a Catholic point of view, I think it would be ok. From a point of view of sexual orientation blindness, I suppose it would be a personal choice. To make it mandatory would be unethical.

From that point of view, I don’t see the exact why, other than coercion, as being that important to a decision to take the hypothetical ‘gay-pill.’

I would say from what is proposed by this study, I don’t know if that could be just changed by a pill, possibly other than taking hormones. I think that much of the factors would come from embryoinic to early childhood development, and one wouldn’t know the effects of sexual orientation until much later.

 

[Ridgerunner]

They studied the brains of 90 adults and concluded that the result seen reflects fetal development? Seems like a bit of a leap to me.

There is no question that what one does can affect different parts of one’s brain. The very simplest example is that the brain develops receptors for certain drugs BECAUSE OF taking those drugs. The development is generally not reversible, which is why addicts have such a terrible time “kicking the habit”.

Concert pianists have different brain structures than do people who are not. People who are mentally active have different brain structures from those who are not.

One interesting study showed that autopsy of nuns demonstrated plaques identified with advanced Alzheimer’s among nuns who had no symptoms of the disease whatever, while non-nuns with the very same plaques did have profound symptoms of it. Were they, prior to birth, somehow destined by their DNA both to have plaques and to become nuns, or is there something about being a nun that prevents or retards the development of Alzheimer’s symptoms? Pretty hard to believe the former.

If the results were not “cooked” (and one wonders, since the researchers would be lionized by a certain crowd for coming up with the result they did) it still doesn’t get us past what doctors sometimes refer to as the “rain dance phenomenon”. One cannot legitimately leap from an observed fact to a cause.

 

[jman507]

They studied the brains of 90 adults and concluded that the result seen reflects fetal development? Seems like a bit of a leap to me.

It would seem to me, having 90 adults that all perfectly show clear differences between straight and gay men and women doesn’t seem realistic. If it was that clear, I’m sure it wouldn’t have taken that long to discover. I just highly doubt anatomy works out that perfectly.

The quote from the doctor that says this makes it clear for me ,it is genetics, seem to follow along with that leap too. Actually it’d probably be more physiological and genetic, which would also throw in environmental factors. I wonder if the doctor is making the leap, or if it is the writer finding the right quote.

I think the study is very interesting if it was properly performed. It raises more questions than it answers, and it would be a good lead for better understanding of developmental processes.

 

[minkymurph]

It would seem to me, having 90 adults that all perfectly show clear differences between straight and gay men and women doesn’t seem realistic.
.

I worked as a clinical research assistant for 18 years I’m skeptical of this for the following reasons. In research, no one can afford to have their original hypothesis totally rejected therefore, they have to find some evidence for their hypothesis. If they disprove their own hypothesis, it’s back to the drawing board and they don’t get their MD/PhD or whatever. There is also a question of funding. That’s the cynical side. On the scientific side, 90 is a small sample of the gay population and what does this study say regarding variables? For example, had any of the 90 people sampled taken hormones which could have had an effect of these differences? What about environmental factors which would influence psychological development? Was this taken into account? Leading a homosexual lifestyle itself may also have a profound influnce. To explain, there are people who are pre-disposed to mental illness and are more vulnerable to becoming mentally ill. It can however happen to anyone and mental illness still needs a ‘trigger.’ It doesn’t just happen because you have a certain vulnerablility; environmental factors play a big part. Therefore, looking at brain differences, not enough evidence. We are also dealing with the human mind and scientists don’t know as yet, in terms of substance, what the human mind actually is. I believe there may well be homosexuals who are born with a certain vulnerability. Not enough valid scientific evidence to say they all are and as there are psychological factors involved and numerous variables, a lot more research would be needed to state anything with any clarity. Of course the other factor is, why does the scientific world want to know? So they can cure it, or so society will accept it as ‘normal?’

 

[v3orb]

If science found a cure for homosexuality and made it available, would it be ethical?

And if such a cure was available, why would someone object to taking the cure?

If science could likewise offer a ‘gay-pill’ and make a heterosexual a homosexual, why would someone consider such change? What possible advantage could there be?

Nobody would take the pills unless faced with peer pressure or discrimination. Example : would you object to having your sexual orientation changed after the opposite sex your entire life, even before you could love romantically? I doubt that you wouldn’t.

 

[Nickkname]

One way you could become homosexual is through exposure to homosexual activity. For example, two of my friends - whom will remain nameless - became homosexual. Not really by choice but by exposure to homosexual acts. They kept reading homosexaul books and looking at homosexual pornography, and the more they read and looked, the more they became de-sensitized to the activity, until finally they believed homosexual activity was okay, not a sin at all, and they became homosexuals. I don’t know why they were looking at those books and porn stuff in the first place, maybe out of curiosity or humor, but, it definitely changed them.

Looking at them now, I believe this is the way society is heading. Very scary. Of course, no matter the darkness or the terror or the evil or the persecution, the future is very bright, because Christ will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his Kingdom will have no end.

 

[convert_2000]

A few years back I took classes on addiction.They knew that any (abnormal) behavior that continued over time, changes the structure of the brain. It’s known to be that way in pornography addition today. These so called to theories are not new at all, they just set it in a different context. The brain of an abused child will scan different than one that has not been abused.

 

[wabrams]

I’m curious as to what type of “scans” they did.

 

[pathia]

I’m curious as to what type of “scans” they did.

MRI’s and PET’s. Both are very well know techniques, there isn’t anything controversial or unaccepted about the technology they used to get the scans.

 

[wabrams]

MRI’s and PET’s. Both are very well know techniques, there isn’t anything controversial or unaccepted about the technology they used to get the scans.

Those are the 2 I kinda figured they would use.

 

[gwendes]

@Father of 8

Thanks for that ‘evidence’ clearly we don’t need to investigate with science at all…

**@ all the homophobic babblers ** If you seriously think that your religion or faith in a deity permits you to treat other people as inferior or ‘sinful’ you are sorely mistaken.

It is disgusting.

 

[LRThunder]

@Father of 8

Thanks for that ‘evidence’ clearly we don’t need to investigate with science at all…

**@ all the homophobic babblers ** If you seriously think that your religion or faith in a deity permits you to treat other people as inferior or ‘sinful’ you are sorely mistaken.

It is disgusting.

It doesn’t permit us to treat other people as inferior, but we’re supposed to oppose sinful actions. Please don’t equate opposing homosexual behavior with hatred of homosexuals.

 

[gwendes]

It doesn’t permit us to treat other people as inferior, but we’re supposed to oppose sinful actions. Please don’t equate opposing homosexual behavior with hatred of homosexuals.

Please make a clear distinction.

I don’t think homosexuality is a sin and find it offensive that anyone would. Justify your ‘opposition’ anyway you like.

 

[estesbob]

Please make a clear distinction.

I don’t think homosexuality is a sin and find it offensive that anyone would. Justify your ‘opposition’ anyway you like.

I think homosexuality is a sin and find it offensive that anyone would not. Justify your ‘opposition’ anyway you like