Jump to content

christian forums

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Forums

Welcome to Worthy Christian Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Gay Brains and Whatnot


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
62 replies to this topic

#1
gray wolf

gray wolf

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,421 posts
My daughter keeps showing me articles which suggest that brains in gay people are like those of the opposite sex. I am looking for references that present the scenario in a different light. Does anyone know of some resources I could read?

#2
OakWood

OakWood

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,813 posts

My daughter keeps showing me articles which suggest that brains in gay people are like those of the opposite sex. I am looking for references that present the scenario in a different light. Does anyone know of some resources I could read?

 

I've heard this before, but it means nothing. Even if their brains are like those of the opposite sex, it doesn't mean to say that they were born that way. When we become corrupted by sin maybe our brains do change. Who knows?

I don't know of any sources off the top of my head. I read this a long time ago. It's a theory that I'd almost forgotten about.



#3
LadyC

LadyC

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,724 posts

that's actually the way to do the research... i know i've seen shows about how one's environment affects the brain's development.



#4
OakWood

OakWood

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,813 posts

Gray Wolf, try this:

 

http://www.scienceda...80617151845.htm



#5
Cletus

Cletus

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 713 posts
The only reason this is an issue is because there are three requirements for something to be considered a civil right. The third requirement is that "you must be born that way" meaning its genetic or your brain is different or something biological to say so. There is a book that outlines the gay agenda called "after the ball" which is very insightful on the gay communitys plot and when you read it you can see they are acomplishing their goals however they cant find any single shread of evidence that is scientific that can be replicated which if something is scientificly sound it can be replicated. Also I should note every single study I have turned up trying to prove gay people are born that way which would be grounds for sodomy to be a civil right, well the studies have not held any water. The data was manipulated, or controls where not used. A man named simon levay did the 1st highly public study in early 90s. His study suggested a structural diffrence in the interior hypothalumus however no controls where used, nor did they know the sexuality of the cadavers used. If I am not mistaken I think the specific place in the brain was called the INAH3. Said in gay men to be larger but cant be replicated. Simon levay is an admitted homosexual and also admitted in 1994 he didnt prove such by his research. There was another study done by bailey and pillard that was published in a december issue of general psyciatry. Thos study had to do with twins being gay for genetics of being identical. Dean hammer also did a study on genetics of the x chromosone xq28 was the location, again no lab controls. I think a man named george rice tried to replicate his findings and didnt. Fact sheet may 2000 by american psyc association can be found online too. As I said earlier homosexuals want to prove its genetic and nothing proves thisnor will it because God dont make people gay. Thats why they call it an alternative life style. Its a choice by their own words. Do not be decieved by the deception. There is much info on the internet to find and what I have posted should get you off to a good start. Happy hunting.

#6
BeauJangles

BeauJangles

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 285 posts

gray wolf, yeah there's been a theoretic study out there, and it's not new... It's "theory" and not scientific law. Like the "Big Bang Theory", "Theory of Evolution", etc. Odd how lay-persons and many scientists take these "theories" and turn them into a religion. Atheism is a religion. And their philosophy is based on theory. Never mind trying to convince an atheist, their belief is a religion... But it is. 

 

So, on to the theoretic study of genetics and the so-called, "homosexual gene." There have been extensive studies concerning homosexuality, homosexual tendencies, and/or latent homosexuality. Since the beginnings of modern psychology, homosexuality was considered a deviant (perverse) psycho-sexual disorder. Further extensive studies continued through the 50's-70's, with Kinsey and Masters and Johnson. Very controversial in their day.

 

Case studies for these disorders were numerous. "Cures" were various, but with little psychological success. By the late 70's, homosexuality became labeled as: An alternate sexual lifestyle "choice". This created quite an uproar in most Christian denominations and organizations. But the gay community both applauded and embraced the idea: "I was born this way." and "If God wanted me to be heterosexual, He wouldn't have given me these desires." Many souls perished, under the pretense of this "new theory". It was a philosophy from doctrines of devils. And the search for the "gay gene" intensified.  

 

Autopsies were performed on cranial examinations of a number of homosexual males. (exact numbers were not disclosed) It was reported that a portion of the brain identified as the: hypothalamus in these males were smaller than that of heterosexual males. The reports went on to comment, this region of the brain were similar in size with females... And the "gay gene" was created. This only fanned the flames of  "gender identity disorder" among others. And the damnation of hell fire could not be quenched. It remains so, to this day. Sad to say, my step-brother struggled in this area of his life. He fell for the gay gospel found on-line... And succumbed to HIV in 1991.

 

gray wolf, this information was not obtained from the internet, but from medical books in the family's personal library. We have many professionals in the field of medicine... Doctors, nurses, etc. I hope this was somewhat helpful as to your inquiry.

God bless you,

David/BeauJangles

 

P.S. If by some chance my information on the topic differs from any one else posting in reply, please do not mistake it as a dispute, or insult by any means. Thank you, Shalom Aleichem.
 


Edited by BeauJangles, 11 May 2014 - 11:28 PM.


#7
kwikphilly

kwikphilly

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts

http://www.patheos.c...-it-to-gain-it/

 

Hi Gray!    I still don't know how to post links...it is hit & miss for me-LOL   But you might find this an interesting read

God Bless you brother.............                                                       With love in Christ Jesus,Kwik



#8
gray wolf

gray wolf

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,421 posts

Thanks all for the input.  I don't still have a resource of a definitive study, but I'll keep looking.  I can't let her win this argument.



#9
a-seeker

a-seeker

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Thanks all for the input.  I don't still have a resource of a definitive study, but I'll keep looking.  I can't let her win this argument.

I have no source; but I would love if you posted what you find!

 

As far as I have heard, the sciences (whch branch I am not sure of) have found certain genetic similarities among gays.  This is not to be equated with the fictional "gay gene".  Some of the genetic components are those related to (that is, manifest themselves in) creativity, anxiety, certain areas of intelligence.  Thus in one sense we can talk of homosexuals being "born that way": they have the right genetic makeup to push in one direction given the right environment.   I still have yet to come across an argument which shows that such legitimates embracing that lifestyle.  Siamese twins are "born that way" and yet we all regard that as a distortion.  There is probably a genetic component behind every single vice, and therefore everyone can talk of being "born that way".

 

clb



#10
gray wolf

gray wolf

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,421 posts

Too bad that atheist person got banned.  It was one of the worst definitions of religion I'd heard.  I'm still scratching my head.



#11
kwikphilly

kwikphilly

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts

Blessings Gray,,,,,

    LOL,yeah...I was shaking my head there for a minute,,I had to read it 3 times to be sure I was reading correctly?????

                                                                                                                                                                 Love ya,Kwik

 

Have you considered taking your daughter to the Word of God,there is really no argument ,,,,science,genes,dna is the clay,,,the Potter is the Authority!God does not make mistakes,it is a choice

 

Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.                  Eph6:4



#12
jerryR34

jerryR34

    Veteran Member

  • Nonbeliever
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 715 posts
 

It's "theory" and not scientific law.


Scientific laws are contained within theories i.e. the law of gravity is a part of gravitational theory. A theory is the highest order of explanation in science.

#13
Willa

Willa

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,205 posts
The hypothalamus, If I remember correctly, functions both as a cluster of nucleii of neurons or brain tissue, and as a gland which secretes hormones. It primarily maintains homeostasis or balance, such as of fluids, weight, body temperature, blood pressure and other life preserving systems. So its size may reflect slightly on its activity or the demands placed on it.

But I understand that the scientist who first submitted this theory of size difference in gay men later admitted that he did so after great pressure from gay activists and out of compassion for those who were being treated with cruelty. It is no excuse for slanting scientific data or drawing unwarrented conclusions. Also, no converse data is produced by the hypothalamus of lesbians, to my knowledge. If his theory were correct, the hypothalamus of lesbians should be larger than the average woman's. But that is my bizaar logic.

#14
Cletus

Cletus

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 713 posts

It's "theory" and not scientific law.

Scientific laws are contained within theories i.e. the law of gravity is a part of gravitational theory. A theory is the highest order of explanation in science.

you have that backwards. Laws have been proven and found to be accurate 100 percent of the time. A theory has not been proven. It is only a best guess.. the whole scientific process is clear on this. If you do a little vocabulary research you will see what I am saying to be accurate

#15
jerryR34

jerryR34

    Veteran Member

  • Nonbeliever
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 715 posts
 

It's "theory" and not scientific law.

Scientific laws are contained within theories i.e. the law of gravity is a part of gravitational theory. A theory is the highest order of explanation in science.


you have that backwards. Laws have been proven and found to be accurate 100 percent of the time. A theory has not been proven. It is only a best guess.. the whole scientific process is clear on this. If you do a little vocabulary research you will see what I am saying to be accurate




Why Isn't Evolution Considered a Law?


This is an issue which often confuses the general public, as the two words, theory and law, have very different common meanings. But in science, their meanings are very similar. A theory is an explanation which is backed by "a considerable body of evidence," while a law is a set of regularities expressed in a "mathematical statement." This is why Newton's Laws of Motion are referred to as laws and not theories. They are expressed with simple equations (like f = ma for his 2nd Law of Motion). Evolution, and most of Biology, cannot be expressed in a concise mathematical equation, so it is referred to as a theory. A scientific law is not "better" or "more accurate" than a scientific theory. A law explains what will happen under certain circumstances, while a theory explains how it happens.

http://evolutionfaq....-considered-law

#16
Cletus

Cletus

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 713 posts
Jerry r34,
evolution isnt considered a law because its not proven. Its just a theory. A best guess. A hypothisis.

A theory is a group of ideas meant to explain a certian topic. A theory is not proven. A law is something that is proven. You can try to twist words all you want. Great minds of the scientific industry can try all they want to redefine a word to better fit what they want it to mean. However the english language was derived from other languages that have words that have been defined for centurys previous to the english language. You cant just redefine words to make them mean what you want them to. That act Is in itself discrediting to the foundation of anything one wishes to discuss on the topic. The only confusion here is those who pervert the english language to futher teaching of falsehoods.
If you honestly believe what you say then you believe whatever someone tells you that isnt proven. A mere theory you take for fact. I would encourage you to take just a few moments to look up the word theory. Read its definition. If you invest the thirty to fourty seconds to do this you will find I am telling you the truth, which sometimes hurts but in the long run is good for you.

#17
gray wolf

gray wolf

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,421 posts

A theory is more than a hypothesis.  It is a model more precisely that should explain observations and make predictions.  



#18
jdxp

jdxp
  • Members
  • 38 posts

Jerry r34,
evolution isnt considered a law because its not proven. Its just a theory. A best guess. A hypothisis.

A theory is a group of ideas meant to explain a certian topic. A theory is not proven. A law is something that is proven. You can try to twist words all you want. Great minds of the scientific industry can try all they want to redefine a word to better fit what they want it to mean. However the english language was derived from other languages that have words that have been defined for centurys previous to the english language. You cant just redefine words to make them mean what you want them to. That act Is in itself discrediting to the foundation of anything one wishes to discuss on the topic. The only confusion here is those who pervert the english language to futher teaching of falsehoods.
If you honestly believe what you say then you believe whatever someone tells you that isnt proven. A mere theory you take for fact. I would encourage you to take just a few moments to look up the word theory. Read its definition. If you invest the thirty to fourty seconds to do this you will find I am telling you the truth, which sometimes hurts but in the long run is good for you.

You've totally mischaracterized what constitutes a scientific theory. The definition you provided is the popular take on a theory. This is what we can an equivocation. Newton's theory of gravity is also a theory, but no one disputes its validity (except when it makes faulty predictions in extreme cases, such as the orbit of Mercury.) General Relativity is also just a theory, and who disputes it? Germ theory is just a theory, but who still believes that illness is caused by spirits or vapors or harmful airs?

 

The meanings of words change. My favorite example is ejaculation. Words change. It's a fact of life. And new words are introduced. And the definitions of some words are intentionally changed. Some words are spliced together when there is no fitting English word. When texts are translated (especially from German), it's often necessary to splice words together. Language is not some static entity, a monolith of fixed definitions.



#19
kwikphilly

kwikphilly

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts

Blessings Everyone....
    Perhaps this will help(for anyone interested)
    A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.
   A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.
    A law generalizes a body of observations. At the time it is made, no exceptions have been found to a law. Scientific laws explain things, but they do not describe them. One way to tell a law and a theory apart is to ask if the description gives you a means to explain 'why

                                                                                                                                                   With love,in Christ-Kwik



#20
other one

other one

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,530 posts

Every time I see this thread in the list my eyes see Gay Brains but my mind registers Gray Brains....   funny how some minds work.






Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Message Boards - 1999-2014 part of the Worthy Network