What do emotion, mood and anxiety have to do with “thinking”? What told me the article was written by a straight female?

I think that gays and lesbians should have this test taken in Iran and then come back with the results. I am sure that president will be fair and give us his results. All of you freaks along with the MSNBC crew should go to Iran and get some real results. pushing the gay agenda just isn’t going to work in this country. you are freaks today tomorrow and for ever.

Which came first? The chicken or the egg?
Answer me this:
1. Do people think they’re homosexual because their brain operates like the opposite sex?

2. Or, does their brain develop according to their sexual orientation?

I believe there are plenty of people who do feel “manly” or “feminine”, and so at the culture’s influence says, “Oh! I must be gay.” I’d say no, just different. But the

How about faulty conclusions: genetics or womb exposure? That is a preconception with no evidence. I would posit another hypothesis (with more actual support): how about behavior affecting brain activity. This study cannot make any conclusions as to the source of the behavior. It can only note that certain behaviors resemble each other in brain activity. Yet another ridiculous propaganda report…

All of the comments left by readers are negative and demeaning! What are they afraid of? I bet Mr. Brown has numerous skeltons in his “closet”. Homophobes are more frightening than homosexuals ever could be! Grow up people! Live and let live! And, if Mr. Brown doesn’t like living among homo’s he should move to IRAN! That way he will be safe!

This is what I love about Fox. If you go to the Scientific American website they have a link to the actual paper, and you can at least read their discussion. They give a little discussion as to what causes these asymmetries and site three common factors are talked about: “environmental effects, genetics, and sexual hormones”. They give some arguments as to it not being environmental, including a study that shows the existence of asymmetries in fetus’ (although in fairness, these were failed to be detected in other studies–but since only <3% of the population is homosexual, this may not be surprising). They rule out genetic factors since currently it is thought to play little role in female homosexuality. Sex hormonal influences have been observed in monkeys, but to what extent they play a role in human sexual development is (according to the paper) unknown. The end result is no one can say from this study what causes this asymmetry, and it warrants further examination.

So next time, before you start saying it’s propaganda, and and the “gay agenda”, or think that this paper has made conclusions based on circumstantial evidence, I suggest actually reading the paper–at least the discussion of the paper.

PS: On the bbc website, they quote the authors as saying ‘The Karolinska team said that these differences could not be mainly explained by “learned” effects, but needed another mechanism to set them, either before or after birth.’

So why don’t gay men pair up with lesbians and vice versa? This set up would keep the “straight” society from getting all upset over all this stuff. They would still be abiding by the Bible’s interpretation of marriage between a man and a woman yet not having to change themselves. It shouldn’t be anyone’s business which side of the relationship is man or woman – that should be between them.

The last sentence of this story says it all, “The study was unable to conclude whether the differences are responsible for sexual orientation”. People can come to whatever conclusions they wish if they have an agenda. That’s the bottom line. They need homosexuality to be a “natural occurrance” so voila, this study. Think of it this way, one of the reasons for a sexual relationship is to propagate the human race. A homosexual relationship cannot accomplish this, it is not a natural relationship. Maybe someday common sense will return to this nation.

There are guidelines for a true scientific study. Something smells fishy about this one. Maybe too few participants and and not an objective researcher? This would not be the first time someone has tried to use “scientific research” to prove their agenda, and here in the U.S. it’s ok with the socialist elite to use the taxpayers money to try and deceive the taxpayers.

Quite frankly, there are some homosexual behaviors that are just harmful to good mental, spiritual , and physical health. Bath-houses, many sexual partners, coprophilla, barebacking, and sadomasochism, that’s just to name some. The situation that happened in San Francisco last summer at the street fair doesn’t speak very highly of homosexuality either. That is probably why the msm just did’t report on this “minority group’s” fun time. “Street sex”, nudity,and lewd sexual perversion in front of children just doesn’t play well in River City.

and these 2 think alike as well:

http://thebruceblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/mccain-and-bush-renew-their-vows-on-same-sex-marriage/

The problem with this type of study is that they often are not able to be replicated. It is extremely difficult to link a “genetic” or “anatomical” trait to observable behavior. Although the relative sizes of different brain structures is interesting, many factors contribute to the development of the adult brain (some known, some unknown.) The reader must keep in mind that Phrenology was once considered a science. It may be that the authors are on to something important. However, Further investigation may end up showing that the the shape and size of what is inside the skull has no more influence on behavior than the shape and size of the outside of the skull. That said, I am glad that people do this research. The job of a scientist is to bring objective understanding to that which is not understood. In order to do that, they must have their work reviewed and then have it published for the world to see. If they are proved to be right, the world will know; if wrong, well that comes with the territory.

If gays and lesbians had their way, such a study would have never been conducted in the first place. They are probably afraid of any conclusions that might be drawn from such a study. One way of studying the unknown is to begin with a possible theory to prove or disprove. Whether you like the conclusion or not is irrelevant. The study can be determined to have an incorrect conclusion or incomplete later. Or it can open up a new line of questioning or thinking. Darwin’s theory of evolution is inconclusive, but it opened up a whole new line of thinking that has provided insight to life’s origins. Newton’s laws of motion were accepted as absolute for almost 200 years. But Einstein proved them not wrong, but incomplete. I am afraid that any study on the study of homosexuality will be screamed about by either side. What a shame.

Great, closer to a cure!