A review of scientific data concludes homosexuals are not ‘born that way’. Additionally, many other commonly held ideas about gender and sexuality lack scientific support.
The report, by Dr Lawrence S. Mayer and Dr. Paul R. McHugh, is published in the fall (autumn) 2016 edition of The New Atlantis.
It is titled Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences.
It presents biological, psychological, and social science evidence to conclude:
(1) homosexuals are not ‘born that way’,
(2) they experience adverse health outcomes which can not entirely be attributed to social stigma, and
(3) people can not have a innate gender different from their biological one.
The authors are highly qualified and hugely experienced. Dr Mayer is the scholar in residence in the Department of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a statistics and biostatistics professor at Arizona State University.
Dr McHugh was the psychiatrist-in-chief at the Johns Hopkins Hospital for 25 years. He is a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
The authors considered more than 200 peer-reviewed studies related to human sexuality. They found that understandings of sexual orientation and gender identity as “innate” rather than fluid are “not supported by scientific evidence.”
Acts 17:11 (The Bereans) were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
’Sexual Orientation’ ‘not innate’
In part one, on ‘Sexual Orientation’, the authors say:
‘The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are “born that way” — is not supported by scientific evidence.
‘While there is evidence that biological factors such as genes and hormones are associated with sexual behaviors and attractions, there are no compelling causal biological explanations for human sexual orientation. …
‘Longitudinal studies of adolescents suggest that sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people, with one study estimating that as many as 80% of male adolescents who report same-sex attractions no longer do so as adults … .
‘Compared to heterosexuals, non-heterosexuals are about two to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse.
’Adverse health and mental health’
In part two, ‘Sexuality, Mental Health Outcomes, and Social Stress’, they conclude:
‘Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.
‘Members of the non-heterosexual population are estimated to have about 1.5 times higher risk of experiencing anxiety disorders than members of the heterosexual population, as well as roughly double the risk of depression, 1.5 times the risk of substance abuse, and nearly 2.5 times the risk of suicide.
‘Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of the non-transgender population. Especially alarmingly, the rate of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals is estimated at 41%, compared to under 5% in the overall U.S. population.
‘There is evidence, albeit limited, that social stressors such as discrimination and stigma contribute to the elevated risk of poor mental health outcomes for non-heterosexual and transgender populations.’
Not ‘born that way’
In part three, Gender Identity, they come down firmly against the ‘born that way’ mantra:
‘The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a woman trapped in a man’s body” — is not supported by scientific evidence.
‘According to a recent estimate, about 0.6% of U.S. adults identify as a gender that does not correspond to their biological sex.
‘Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone sex-reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes. One study found that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were about 5 times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide.’
’Little scientific evidence’
The authors express particular concern for the current fashion for putting children on gender reassignment pathways:
‘Children are a special case when addressing transgender issues. Only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.
‘There is little scientific evidence for the therapeutic value of interventions that delay puberty or modify the secondary sex characteristics of adolescents, although some children may have improved psychological well-being if they are encouraged and supported in their cross-gender identification. There is no evidence that all children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior should be encouraged to become transgender.’
’Fix minds, not genitalia’
Writing on the report, Dr Michael Brown said the authors of the report would be castigated rather than its findings challenged:
‘When it comes to Dr. McHugh, he committed the cardinal sin of opposing sex-change surgery during his tenure at Johns Hopkins Hospital, which is why that surgical procedure was dropped under his leadership. But he did this based on years of interaction with those who identified as transgender, interviewing them before and after surgery, ultimately concluding that, “We psychiatrists … would do better to concentrate on trying to fix their minds and not their genitalia”.’
Luke 5:31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.
The report is already being attacked by homosexual activists and is unlikely to make it into the mainstream media.
Its common-sense conclusions that there’s no scientific support for thinking homosexual feelings and attractions are innate, that the negative mental health outcomes of homosexuals cannot be blamed on ‘homophobia’, that homosexuals are not born that way and that “sex reassignment surgery” is not the best treatment for gender confusion would inform policy-makers, if the latter were in any sense concerned about public health rather than how their policies play with homosexual lobbyists.
Prov 14:12 (cf 16:25) There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
Support us!
We appreciate your support; it enables our research and helps us inform your prayers.
So click below to support Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings
Click on the social media links below to share this post:
Liberals rarely let facts get in the way of their ideologies!
Nor do Christians or Muslims, or Communists, let’s be honest !
If we are being really honest, we’ll include everyone. But ‘the facts’ are always going to support the Biblical position, because the whole creation was made by God.
I have rarely seen people as stupid as you who state that “homosexuals are not ‘born that way’ and that many other commonly held ideas about gender and sexuality lack scientific support.”
I wish that you’re gonna have lots of gay sons and daughters: they will be able to clarify this
No, that’s not being ‘stupid’, it’s reporting what researchers have said. It would be really, really stupid to ignore that evidence. As, of course, homosexual activists and their political friends do.
Jesus said that He was “the Way, the Truth and the Life”, Rox, and that “no-one comes to the Father but through me”. That excludes all other religions, however well meaning they may be, or however nice their followers are. (“How intolerant!” the cretins cry. They don’t know the meaning of the word “tolerance”).
All true Christians, (as opposed to mere church-goers, most of whom, imo give God a bad name), can testify to this. I defy you to find one fact that contradicts the Bible.
You need to get yourself born-again, my friend, then you “will know the truth, and the truth will set you free”. (He didn’t say it would be comfortable).
“He would say that, wouldn’t he ?” is the glib answer.
Mohammed and Buddha didn’t say that about Jesus (hardly Buddha’s fault, I must agree).
Here’s a fact to contradict the following passage :
“Believers will drive out demons in my name and speak in strange tongues; if they handle snakes or drink any deadly poison they will come to no harm; and the sick on whom they lay their hands will recover”.
Mark 16: 17-18 , Revised English Bible (Oxford University Press 1989).
Although a trifle unfamiliar, this is an important passage which I have chosen, the last words of Jesus on earth, according to Mark, ending his final instructions to his disciples before his ascension.
The fact is, setting aside the demons, strange tongues, and laying on of hands, Christians are harmed by snake venom and other poisons, just like anyone else. If you deny that, it would be easy to arrange a trial at your own risk.
There are no similar instructions reported by Matthew or John, who don’t mention the ascension at all.
Luke mentions the ascension in Acts, with the instructions reduced to “you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you”. (Acts 1:8) .
Nonetheless, Mark 16: 17-18 is there in the Bible, and Christians have been contradicting it for centuries by dying from poisons and snakebite.
“Christians” who deliberately put themselves in harm’s way by inviting snakes to bite them etc are “putting God to the test” which Christians are told not to do (Deut 6:16). Your quote from Jesus is not a command to His followers to deliberately test God by, as I say, encouraging snakes to bite them.
The situation is analagous to Jesus’ temptation in the desert in eg Matt 4 vv1-11, especially verses 6 & 7: Satan quotes Scripture to Jesus inviting Him to throw Himself off the Temple because Scripture says that God will rescue Him. In your piece above, you are likening this to a command, to throw Himself off the Temple because God will rescue Him (ie Jesus should invite snakes to bite Him/His followers to prove they will do Him/His followers no harm). Jesus replies by quoting Scripture back at Satan, “Do not put the Lord your God to the test”.
People are NOT born homos; they become that way because of a number of factors, eg. it may be that something happened in their childhood that made them shun normal relationships.
Whatever the reason they are like that, they can change (1st Cor 6 v 11) provided, of course, they have a will to do so.
Homo, if it’s Latin, means “man”. People are born boys, to grow into men.
Homo, if it’s Greek, means the “same”. If you don’t think people are all born the same, you tend to be supporting the view that some are born different.
What sort of doctor has his degrees embroidered on his white coat ?
‘Homosexual’ is from the Greek ‘homo’ meaning same. Yes, Bob, if you would write it in full it would save this sort of confusion.
Robert Bly in his book ‘Iron John’ is not the only one to observe that boys really do need to grow into men at a psychological / emotional level as well as physically. If a boy does not, that is, if something arrests that emotional development, you can end up with someone who is emotionally still a child in a grown-up’s body. Classically that might be the lack of a father (especially at an emotional level) or some kind of abuse, physical or more likely sexual, exposure to homosexual pornography or a curse especially from father or mother (‘You’ll never be half the man I am’ or ‘… your father was’).
At that point, he can be trying to fulfill the unmet need to grow up but eroticising it as he is now physically adult. He should be seeking sexual encounters with women. But he can’t, because he is still emotionally a child. It is not pathological to be emotionally nine at the age of nine. It is at the age of twenty-nine.
If someone recognises that, he is on the way to recovering what has been lost, or never found. He will need support and finding such support is not easy.
But if he does not recognise it, or if society cements him into a ‘homosexual orientation’, he can fall into the sin of sodomy (or gross indecency). What can be worse, as Sir Ian McKellen, Tom Daley and Gareth Thomas are doing, he can actively promote the dysfunction. I must confess, although I love my neighbour, those who promote sodomy to the young do try my patience a bit.
It goes without saying the church as a whole should be awake to this scenario in order to help men with this problem, witness to the wholeness and healing that is in Christ and proclaim God’s design for human kind.
I haven’t mentioned women and lesbianism. There are parallels with the male homosexual condition. But it is a bit more complex, from what the various authors say.
Dr Mayer is MD, MS, PhD, so the embroidery is not quite up-to-speed. Don’t forget, Rox, Americans are not as self-effacing as us Brits.
Rox, if you’re still following this thread, I realise my answer to you re the snakes etc was insufficient, I think. I will get back to you, after considering the matter with, hopefully, the help of the Lord. Unless anyone else wants to chip in?
It also occurs to me that I may have too much time on my hands!