A Major Scientific Study Confirms (What We All Knew): Men ARE Different than Women

Every so often, a moment of sanity prevails in our culture, quite unintentionally. At such times, reality hits home, and most people don’t even notice it. But that’s exactly what happened with the announcement of the findings of a major scientific study. For a split second, reality overtook ideology, as left-leaning journalists shared the results of this study without thinking through the implications...

A Major Scientific Study Confirms What We All Knew: Men ARE Different than Women | Articles | AskDrBrown

Every so often, a moment of sanity prevails in our culture, quite unintentionally. 

At such times, reality hits home, and most people don’t even notice it. But that’s exactly what happened with the announcement of the findings of a major scientific study. 

For a split second, reality overtook ideology, as left-leaning journalists shared the results of this study without thinking through the implications.

I’m referring to the news, first reported widely on Fortune.com that, “Women are more empathetic than men, study of hundreds of thousands of people finds—at any age and in any country in the world.”

In response I tweeted sarcastically, “A major new study has revealed that ‘women are more empathetic than men.’ This leads to two startling revelations: 1) there is such a thing as women and men.  2) there are real differences between women and men. What do you know!”

Yes, presupposed in this major international study, which involved 300,000 participants, is the fact that there is such a thing as males and females. 

They really exist, and their existence can be defined, despite efforts to make “woman” (and, by extension) “man” undefinable. (Think of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s now infamous answer to the “What is a woman?” question, and see Matt Walsh’s “What Is a Woman?” documentary.)

Without this presupposition, namely, that there is such a thing as women and men, the study would have no meaning. In fact, it would be impossible even to conduct the study. Otherwise, all we would have is the difference between humans and humans. That’s it! 

We could not report on differences between women and men, since sex and gender are merely what we perceive them to be. Instead, we would have differences between humans, and the results would be, “On average, certain humans are more empathetic than other humans.”

It would be like doing a major survey comparing the health of taller people (let’s say people 6 feet tall or more) to shorter people (here, under 6 feet tall). The only way it could work would be if height was definable and tangible. But if my height was whatever I perceived it to be, so much for the study. I would have no meaning or purpose at all.

It’s the same with differences between the sexes. If sex (and, consequently, gender) is whatever I perceive it to be, then scientific studies like this are worthless. After all, if I’m a biological male who identifies as a female, then I have undermined the whole premise of the study. 

How, then, did the makers of this health study craft their questions so as to get tangible, substantive answers?

When you click on the test itself, conducted under the auspices of the University of Cambridge, you are asked a series of background questions, beginning with, “What is your age?”

This reminds us that “age” is not a matter of perception, even if we feel younger or older than our actual years. Our age is identifiable, going back to the year we were born. That is a fact.

The second question is: “What was your biological sex assigned at birth?” What do you know! 

Despite the use of radicalized leftist language, as if your sex was arbitrarily assigned to you at birth by the doctors and nurses, the survey must ask for biological reality. 

Otherwise, to repeat, the survey has no meaning at all.

Quite tellingly, in today’s upside down culture, you can’t simply ask, “What is your sex?” Instead, you need to ask what was written on your birth certificate when you were born. Your actual, biological sex matters!

Even so, the survey listed the options of: “Male; Female; Intersex; I prefer not to say; I do not know.” (Are we really supposed to believe that some people do not know if they were born male or female? We’re not talking here about the very real biological category of Intersex, where there is potential ambiguity.)

Not surprisingly, given the madness of our woke society, the next question asks, “What is your gender?” 

Here the choices are more expansive (but of course!): “Female; Male; Transfemale; Transmale; Non-binary; Other; I prefer not to say; I do not know.” (Enough said. I don’t need to make any commentary here.)

What is remarkable, though, is the test results page (I took the test to see how I scored).

Under, “Your Empathy score (EQ)” we are told that, “Most females score 6 to 16” and “Most males score 4 to 15.”

What happened to all the other categories? 

What happened to the transfemales and transmales and non-binary people?

Those categories no longer exist, displaced by differences between “females” and “males,” and that information was gleaned in question 2: When you were born, what was your biological sex? That’s what really matters.

Later, the test results page explains that, “On average, more men than women have a Type S brain type and more women than men have a Type E brain type. It is suggested that these brain types are caused by genetic and prenatal hormonal levels (2,3), as well as by environmental factors.”

Accordingly, the Fortune.com article reported that, “Females, on average, score significantly higher in cognitive empathy scores than males regardless of nationality, language spoken, and age, a massive new study published on Monday in the journal PNAS found.” And the 250-word abstract of the study references “females” 8 times – without qualification or equivocation. 

Accordingly, David Greenberg, a psychologist and social neuroscientist at Israel’s Bar-Ilan University and lead author on the study, commented, “Our results provide some of the first evidence that the well-known phenomenon—that females are on average more empathic than males—is present in a wide range of countries across the globe. It’s only by using very large data sets that we can say this with confidence,” 

My wife Nancy saw this reported on CNN in the most matter of fact way, with both the CNN newscaster and the doctor brought in for commentary seeming to forget that is bigoted and transphobic to speak of differences between women and men. In the words of NARL (the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws), “We use gender neutral language when talking about pregnancy, because it is not just cis-gender women who get pregnant.” 

As I wrote in 2017 (with reference to “menstruating men”), “There is an all-out war on sexual difference (often referred to as ‘gender’), and if it wins the day, it will lead to societal chaos.”

That chaos is already here, growing by the day. But for a moment this week, quite unintentionally, reality crept back in and sanity prevailed as news outlets reported the simple, verifiable (and, widely known) fact that women, on average, are more empathetic than men.

Men and women do exist, and there are differences between the two.

Woe to Those Who Call Evil 'Good' and Good 'Evil'

It is one thing to do evil and recognize it as evil. It is another thing to do evil and call it good. As the prophet Isaiah declared more than 2,500 years ago, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20) This has happened many times over the centuries, and it is happening again in our day...

Woe to Those Who Call Evil 'Good' and Good 'Evil' | Articles | AskDrBrown

It is one thing to do evil and recognize it as evil. It is another thing to do evil and call it good. 

As the prophet Isaiah declared more than 2,500 years ago, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20) 

This has happened many times over the centuries, and it is happening again in our day.

Going back two decades, consider Dr. George Tiller, infamous for his late-term abortion practice but hailed as a hero by the pro-abortion movement. In their eyes, he was performing a compassionate service for hurting families, relieving them of the pain of bringing an unwanted child into the world.

There are articles about Tiller with titles like, “A Gentle, Compassionate Man: Remembering Dr. George Tiller,” and, “The Compassion of Dr. Tiller.” The latter article states that, “George Tiller is frequently described as ‘controversial.’ But in the tight-knit world of abortion providers and among the women under his care, he was often called a saint.”

This puts quite a spin on the word saint!

The fact that Tiller was inexcusably murdered in 2009 by a “pro-life” extremist cannot detract from his evil deeds, which included offering his clients package deals for the late-term abortion plus finger printing, baptism, and burial or cremation. 

Yes, Tiller had baptismal ceremonies performed for the babies whose lives he just ended. (This was not only widely known, but I also saw pictures of these baptisms and burials.) 

Tragically, as reported on Live Action, “A former staff member of a late-term abortion facility [meaning, Dr. Tiller’s] has admitted there was nothing wrong with over 98 percent of the babies aborted at her facility.”

In the words of a passionate pro-life leader, “Although he specialized in killing handicapped children, most of his tiny victims were late term, fully-formed, healthy, and viable outside the womb. He performed an average of roughly seven post-viable abortions per week and has admitted on tape to aborting babies a day before the mother’s due date.”

This is the man hailed by some as a saint. 

A pro-life colleague in Charlotte, North Carolina told me about an abortion doctor in the city who tithed on her earnings to her church. 

In her mind, she was doing God’s work. 

The flip side of this is that pro-life leaders who are doing God’s work by standing for the life of the unborn are branded as dangerous lawbreakers. 

What else are we to make of the FBI’s recent arrests of pro-life workers? As reported by The Federalist on October 6, “The FBI raided the home of yet another pro-life activist on Wednesday, as the federal agency ramps up its attacks on political opponents of the Biden regime. With guns drawn, agents swarmed and entered Chester (Chet) Gallagher’s Tennessee home for his role in a peaceful pro-life event that took place over a year ago outside a Mt. Juliet, Tennessee abortion facility.”

Talk about turning our justice system upside down. 

Talk about calling right wrong and wrong right.

The same thing is now happening with medical leaders who speak out against the transitioning of children (in other words, against the chemical castration and/or genital mutilation of minors). They are being threatened with prosecution by the office of the Attorney General for allegedly spreading misinformation that could lead to violence.

As explained in a letter to A. G. Merrick Garland written by Tennessee A. G. Jonathan Sermetti, and signed by 12 other Attorneys General, 

“We, the undersigned State Attorneys General, write to express our deep concern with the recent letter you received from the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, and the Children’s Hospital Association asking you to investigate and prosecute people who question the medical establishment’s current treatment of children struggling with gender dysphoria. You cannot and should not undertake such investigations or prosecutions.”

So, those raising grave concerns about the terribly misguided practice of transitioning children, which has rightly been branded medical malpractice and a massive human rights violation, could be prosecuted as criminals. As for those advocating such practices and performing them, they are the heroes who should be celebrated. Is this not what Isaiah described?

In this same spirit, California governor Gavin Newsom has become the darling of the left as he becomes more and more radical by the day.

As Mayor San Francisco, he rose to national fame by illegally issuing marriage licenses for same-sex couples.

More recently, he sparked a storm of controversy by quoting the words of Jesus (that we should love our neighbor as ourselves) on billboards posted in pro-life states, inviting pregnant women to come to his state for their abortions. 

(See here for my response, where I picture a baby asking Gov. Newsom, “Am I not your neighbor?”) 

As if this was not enough, Newsom also signed a bill that would make California a sanctuary state for minors seeking sex-change surgery and treatments, even against their parents’ will. As reported on the Daily Wire, 

“The bill also bans police from arresting or extraditing someone based on another state’s restrictions for providing gender health services to a child. The law also prohibits California officials from enforcing another state’s order that a child be removed from parents who allow the child to receive gender health services.”

There are now lawmakers who want to have parents criminally prosecuted if they fail to affirm the perceived gender identity of their child (see here and here for examples).

So, the caring parents, who want what is best for their child and recognize that medical intervention is not the best course of action for their confused and hurting minor, are the evil ones, to be prosecuted and even jailed by the government.

This Doctor Is Willing to Destroy a Child’s Future to Keep Them Happy for the Moment

A pro-trans doctor gives this shocking justification: “We try to talk about it [transgenderism], but most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of brain space to talk about it really — in a serious way. That’s always bothered me, but you know, we still want the kids to be happy, happier in the moment, right?” --- Seriously?! You will sterilize a child for life because you want them to be happier in the moment? You will mutilate their healthy body parts because you want them to be happier FOR NOW?

This Doctor Is Willing to Destroy a Child’s Future to Keep Them Happy for the Moment | Articles | AskDrBrown

Many years ago, I saw a cartoon in a magazine depicting a group of people standing around a man who was lying on the ground. 

Someone was crying out, “Is there a doctor in the house?” 

In response, a doctor appeared. But he was not the kind of doctor they needed. It was Dr. Jack Kevorkian, infamous for his support of physician-assisted suicide and with instruments of death in his hand, who came forward to help. 

This was a cruel joke back then. But in today’s world, it is not a joke at all. 

The doctor you call to help your child in the short-term might be the doctor who hurts your child in the long-term. 

In video footage obtained by the Veritas Foundation, Dr. Daniel Metzger, a “doctor with the World Professional Association for Transgender Health expressed concern about the regret that researchers are finding among young adults who transition to the opposite sex when they were children without fully understanding the ramifications.”

Dr. Metzger acknowledged the findings of Dutch researchers and others that many children who transition, upon becoming adults, regret the decision they made.

As young teens (or even younger) they assured their doctors and parents that they were fine with the prospect of not having biological children as a result of the proposed treatments, thinking they could easily adopt a child when they got older. But when the time came to adopt, they discovered it wasn’t so easy. In other cases, when they realized that having a pet dog was not the same thing as having their own child, reality started to sink in.

Yet Dr. Metzger was fully aware of this, stating that these minor children are not really capable of giving informed consent to such life-altering treatments, treatments that will sterilize them (and/or maim them) for life.

He said, “The Pediatric Endocrinology Society meeting — some of the Dutch researchers gave some data about young adults who have transitioned and have reproductive regret. Like, regret, and it’s there, and I don’t think any of that surprises us.”

How could it surprise them if they were being honest with themselves?

Really now, common sense tells us that no 13-year-old girl can fully understand the ramifications of having her healthy breasts removed. 

No 14-year-old boy can fully understand the ramifications of taking sterilizing hormones.

Not only so, but the growing number of destransitioners tells us that the practice of transitioning children is terribly wrong. And a growing body of scientific evidence confirms all this, with several countries now reversing themselves and banning the practice of transitioning children.

Why, then, does Dr. Metzger continue to advocate for this terribly dangerous practice?

He gives this shocking justification: “We try to talk about it [transgenderism], but most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of brain space to talk about it really — in a serious way. That’s always bothered me, but you know, we still want the kids to be happy, happier in the moment, right?”

Seriously? You will sterilize a child for life because you want them to be happier in the moment? You will mutilate their healthy body parts because you want them to be happier for now?

This is the kind of thinking responsible parents work against all the time, telling their children they cannot have what they want now because it is not good for them in the long run. This is what parenting is all about: having the long view, not the momentary view.

That’s why you don’t let your 6-year-old son have chocolate chip cookies for breakfast and ice cream for dinner no matter how much he cries about it. It would make him happier in the moment, but it would be detrimental to his health over the years.

That’s why you make your kids go to sleep at certain times, even though they don’t want to. And that’s why you don’t let them watch certain movies, even though they’re in tears, desperate to watch the latest hot flick. 

This is what responsible parents do. Should we expect anything less from the medical profession?

When our two daughters were teenagers, they told my wife and I that we were way too strict, much stricter than their friends’ parents.

I told them to write out a list of what they would do differently if they were the parents, asking them to hold on to the list until they had children of their own. It’s something we still laugh about today, with their kids ranging in age from 16 to 21, as their list included things like no curfews and no restrictions of activities of any kind.

That’s why we were the parents and they were the children. They were incapable of making some of these critically important decisions at that age, and if we were strict, it was for their long-term good. 

There are some things you simply cannot take back and some decisions you cannot unmake. That’s why you cannot get a tattoo in most states in America unless you are 18 years old, which makes sense. It is a lifelong decision. 

As explained on a tattoo website, “If you’re excited about getting your first tattoo, you need to know how old you have to be to get a tattoo in the US. There are many reasons why there’s an age limit on getting tattoos. The fact that it’s a commitment you make for life, is one reason why you shouldn’t rush into getting inked. 

“The law doesn’t classify you as an adult until your 18th birthday. This means there are restrictions on the decisions you’re allowed to make before you turn 18. It may not seem like a positive thing, especially when you desperately want to get a tattoo. However, getting a tattoo isn’t something you should do on a whim, so the age requirement can save you from future regret.”

And this is just about getting a tattoo, which cannot be compared to the chemical castration or genital mutilation of children.

Yet today, leading medical professionals, people who are supposed to give you good counsel, people who are supposed to help you and your kids make the best health decisions, are sacrificing the long-term mental, emotional, and physical wellbeing of your children for their momentary happiness. 

Is that not a serious form of medical malpractice?

Short-Term Gratification vs Long-Term Satisfaction

A few years ago, I was sticker-shocked while buying some new clothes, when the salesman said something that stayed with me. It's  something to think about next time you are about to do something you will regret...

Short-Term Gratification vs Long-Term Satisfaction | Article | AskDrBrown

A few years ago, I was buying some new clothes to wear on a series of episodes on Christian TV. The salesman, a seasoned pro with a very good eye, picked out some blazers, slacks, and shirts, and after trying them on, I made my final selection. It was only then that I discovered the prices on these items, expressing my surprise out loud. 

In response, the salesman said something that stayed with me. Allow me to share it with you here.

For those who know me, I have never been a sharp dresser (you don’t associate the word “stylish” with me), and I have never spent a lot of money on clothes. So I was a bit surprised to hear the price tag on one particular blazer.

The salesman, a colorful fellow with a catchy name (something like Michelangelo if I recall) said to me, “I once talked with a Lexus car dealer. He told me I could buy a cheaper car, which would give me short-term satisfaction but long-term disappointment. Or I could pay more now, giving me short-term sticker shock but long-term satisfaction.”

I agreed with him in principle, and since I was not paying for the clothes out of my own pocket, I bought the blazer, along with the other items.

A few days later, when I did the TV shoot, recording more than 20 episodes in two days and changing shirts or slacks or blazers after each episode, some of the staff commented to me, “That one blazer looks really good on you!”

They could tell the difference in quality too.

But this article is not about clothing, nor is it about spending lavish amounts of money on our wardrobes. (Be assured that my library is worth many times more than my wardrobe!)

But it is about the principle of short-term gratification vs. long-term satisfaction, a principle found over and again in the Bible.

Think of Esau, who sold his birthright to his brother Jacob because he was hungry and wanted some food. He discarded something of lifelong, generational value to fill his stomach once. How carnal.

Think of Solomon, the wisest man who ever walked the earth, but destroyed the united kingdom of Israel because of his insatiable lust for one more woman. How foolish.

Think of ministers over the years who brought reproach to the name of Jesus, shamed their families and congregations, and undid decades of ministry work because they couldn’t say no to the flesh. How tragic.

Yet on some level, this is something all of us do, overindulging in food or going into debt or disclosing a secret or having an affair or committing a violent act because we couldn’t say no in the moment.

We needed that release. That food tasted too good. We had to have that product. The secret was too juicy. The person was too attractive. Our anger was too strong.

Whatever it was, be it large or small, we yielded to the pull of the moment, only to regret it the next day (or, in some cases, for many days or years to come).

On Wednesday, August 24, I celebrated 8 years of healthy living, all by the grace and mercy of God. (When people tell me how disciplined I am, I ask them, “Then why did it take me 59 years to break my bad eating habits?”)

It is true that, every day, I have to say no to my flesh. I have to refuse to eat more nuts, even though they are raw and organic. I have a certain, small amount, and that’s it.  I have to limit myself to one, 140 calorie health bar (it tastes like chocolate to me; to others, it would taste like beans).

I do have an absolutely massive salad each day, filling a four-quart bowl with all kinds of sumptuous veggies. And I do have three good meals a day, but rarely with any meat (on average, once every week or two, normally grilled chicken). And I thoroughly enjoy the healthy foods that I eat.

But I abstain from dairy, flour, and sugar and follow Dr. Joel Fuhrman’s “eat to live,” plant-based guidelines. And I do this 24/7, regardless of what occasion we’re celebrating or where I’m traveling worldwide. Cheating is not an option.

But the long-term satisfaction is wonderful. Absolutely wonderful!

I can’t describe how good it feels to weigh 180 lbs. rather than 275 lbs. (I’m about 6 feet 2 inches in height.)

I used to have several headaches a week. I have had virtually no headaches in 8 years, meaning roughly 1,250 headaches avoided. Think of that!

Instead of high blood pressure, my blood pressure is optimal.

Instead of my bad cholesterol being high and my good cholesterol being low they are totally reversed.

Instead of lots of lower back pain, there is none. None!

My immune system is massively better than it used to be. My energy level is terrific. (Although I don’t jog much, I ran a mile on my treadmill a few weeks ago in 7:34, and I’m 67 years old.)

To say it once more: the long-term satisfaction is wonderful. Absolutely wonderful!

Again, my only boast is in the Lord. I was the poster boy for unhealthy eating for decades (not gluttony, but unhealthy eating). I was addicted to chocolate and sweets. I was a pizzaholic. I hardly ate any fruit and very little vegetables.

So, if God could help me, He could help you too. (For the journey that Nancy and I took, check out our book Breaking the Stronghold of Food.)

But this article is not just about food. It is about a principle.

Think about it next time when you are about to do something you will regret.

Do you want short-term gratification with lasting regret? Or will you choose short-term discipline with lasting satisfaction?

Make the right choice today. You will thank yourself tomorrow.

How ‘Gender Confirmation’ Surgery Confirms There Are Only Two Genders

It used to be called sex-change surgery, even though it’s impossible to change your sex. Then it was gender reassignment surgery. Now it’s gender confirmation surgery. But whatever you call it, a simple tweet made an important observation, asking, “Why does everyone that ‘transitions’ pick male or female to transition to, when there are supposedly many other genders?”

How ‘Gender Confirmation’ Surgery Confirms there are Only Two Genders | Article | AskDrBrown

It used to be called sex-change surgery, even though it’s impossible to change your sex. 

Then it was gender reassignment surgery. Now it’s gender confirmation surgery. 

But whatever you call it, a simple tweet made an important observation, asking, “Why does everyone that ‘transitions’ pick male or female to transition to, when there are supposedly many other genders?”

That’s a great question. And it’s a fair question. 

Why only “transition” from male to female or female to male?

The answer is ridiculously obvious. It’s because there are only two sexes, male and female. Consequently, there are only two types of bodies into which humans are born, male and female. (Those who are intersex because of a chromosomal or biological abnormality only confirm the rule. They do not form a new gender or sex.)

I’m sure transgender activists would have some kind of response to this, explaining the difference between gender and sex or providing some kind of hairsplitting nuance.

Unfortunately for these activists, the very terms they have chosen to use refute their own arguments. After all, isn’t this called “gender reassignment” or “gender confirmation” surgery? Here, “gender” is identical to male or female anatomy. (And note that, in the early days, these same activists spoke of “sex change surgery.”

That’s because biological realities are pretty stubborn things, as expressed succinctly by a molecular geneticist. When asked why she strongly disagreed with the statement that “transwomen should be legally treated as women,” she replied, “Because I’m a molecular geneticist.”

That’s why a trans-identifying, biological male might say, “I’m attracted to women, but I identify as a female lesbian, and I want to transition to female.”

He might even say, “I identify as multi-gender and am pansexual, but I do not feel at home in a male body and want to transition.”

Either way, the choice is male body or female body. That’s because there are only two sexes/genders.

As the molecular geneticist noted, “Being male, or being female is a developmental process. You can’t go backwards. You can't change your sex.” (By “developmental process” she did not mean something you develop in your own perceptions. She meant biological and genetic development, beginning in the womb.)

That’s why, to this moment, every human being is the product of a male and a female. Every. Single. One.

That’s why female inmates left alone in a prison will never get pregnant, even if they are sentenced to prison for life. But if they share a cell with a “transwoman” who has not had bottom surgery, they might end up pregnant. That’s because the “transwoman” is a male, no matter how he identifies.

That’s why people seeking to transition choose either male or female surgeries. How they identify in their own brains is another matter, with an endless stream of choices, including human, animal, and entirely imaginary.

But when it comes to concrete reality, there are only two choices: male or female. That’s why transpeople identify as MTF or FTM. Those are the options.

To be sure, there are some people who identify as agender or asexual or non-binary to the point of mutilating their bodies in a different way. But the surgery they undergo is called “nullification” surgery (seriously). They are not “transitioning.”

When it comes to transitioning, you either feel trapped in a woman’s body and want to become a man or you feel trapped in a man’s body and want to become a woman.

To say it again: those are the only choices.

As Professor Sherif Girgis pointed out when arguing before the Supreme Court in the Obergefell case, “After all, male and female are not just any two sexes, as black and white are just two races. Maleness and femaleness, and a certain social purpose, are necessarily inter-defined: one cannot fully explain either maleness or femaleness without reference to the other and to a certain social good. The reason is that what differentiates them are not just different anatomical or genetic features, but— at a deeper level of explanation— their joint (basic) physical potential for a biological task: reproduction. And this task, its social value, and its link to sexual composition are certainly not mere social inventions.” (As cited in Ryan T. Anderon, When Harry Became Sally, an important book banned by Amazon.)

Or, in the words of Professors Lawrence Mayer and Paul McHugh, “The underlying basis of maleness and femaleness is the distinction between the reproductive roles of the sexes; in mammals such as humans, the female gestates offspring and the male impregnates the female. More universally, the male of the species fertilizes the egg cells provided by the female of the species. This conceptual basis for sex roles is binary and stable, and allows us to distinguish males from females on the grounds of their reproductive systems, even when these individuals exhibit behaviors that are not typical of males or females.” (Also cited in Anderson.)

As I wrote in February 2021, “In a series of tweets posted on February 3, the ACLU alleged that ‘trans girls are girls’ and that ’the idea of sex being rooted in biology is a ‘myth.’’ Yes, the ACLU affirmed, ‘Biological sex and gender are not binaries,’ and, ‘Trans athletes do not have an unfair advantage in sports.’ Accordingly, the only reason to deny a trans-identified student the right to play on the sports’ team of his or her choice is ‘pure discrimination.’

“To this I say – with love and compassion to these young people who struggle with their gender identity – this is a lot of bunk.”

That’s why a 2017 study conducted by researchers in the Molecular Genetics Department of the Weizmann Institute discovered that of the 20,000 genes analyzed, “6,500 of them are expressed differently in men and women in at least one of the body's tissues.”

“Sex-change” surgery or “gender reassignment” surgery or “gender confirmation” surgery simply confirms what we know.

There are only two sexes/genders. Anything beyond that is the product of our own imaginations.

Monkeypox, STDs, Violating God’s Divine Order, and Receiving Mercy

The latest report on the transmission of monkeypox confirms that it is spread overwhelmingly by men who have sex with men. What should we conclude from this?

Monkeypox, STDs, Violating God’s Divine Order, and Receiving Mercy | Article | AskDrBrown

The latest report on the transmission of monkeypox confirms that it is spread overwhelmingly by men who have sex with men. 

In the early days of AIDS, it was commonplace to hear preachers refer to this “homosexual disease” as a judgment from God.

As recounted by Michael Christensen on the Ministry Matters website, “When I was a pastor in San Francisco, many Christians viewed AIDS as a sign of the end of the world. I kept busy countering the predominant apocalyptic view in evangelical and fundamentalist churches that ‘AIDS was God's judgment on the homosexual lifestyle’ or as ‘punishment for IV drug use.’ I remember trying to help people process (including those in my own congregation) why it was that those whose behavior put them at high risk got AIDS from a virus, not as a punishment from God for immorality.”

At that moment, though, AIDS being a judgment on homosexual men seemed like a perfectly logical conclusion, especially given the climate of the day, when homosexuality was denigrated rather than celebrated by our nation.

Sadly, as pointed out by ex-gay leader Joe Dallas, the church missed a great moment to reach out to gay men across the country at a time when they were terribly fearful of this mysterious and dreadful disease. It was decimating their communities. It was destroying their bodies. It was killing young men in their prime.

Yet the main message these men heard from the church was that God was judging them for their sins.

To repeat: at that moment, it seemed clear that this was the case, that the Lord was striking these transgressors with a modern-day plague. All too few Christian leaders seized the opportunity to reach out to the homosexual community, even if they felt that AIDS was a divine judgment. This should have been the time to visit the sick and dying and offer them mercy and repentance through the cross before it was too late.

Today, we are witnessing another “gay disease,” although one that, at present, is not a fraction as savage and deadly as was AIDS.

First, when we live by our Creator’s rules and honor the proper functions of our body, on average, we will be healthier and live longer.

That’s why insurance companies ask if we smoke or drink.

That’s why people who were obese had a higher chance of dying of COVID, not to mention dying of a host of other conditions, including heart disease.

And that’s why men who have sex with men have a much higher rate of contracting STDs than the rest of the population. Some of their most common sexual acts violate God’s intended use of the body. It is only natural that more diseases are contracted and transmitted.

In fact, simply going outside the bounds of marriage opens people up to more STDs, even somewhat mysteriously.

What I mean is that if a man and woman got married as virgins and had a healthy sex life for years as husband and wife, they would never contract an STD. But if they committed the exact same act with someone they were not married to, they might well contract one.

Why? And how? Where did this STD come from? (The answers to those questions, which are somewhat speculative, are outside the scope of this article. But they are questions worth asking.)

The bottom line is that God made us to thrive as human beings. He designed the body for health, not sickness. And even though it is very true that some of the godliest people on the planet are chronically sick and that some of the wickedest people on the planet are very healthy, the rule is still the same.

When we follow the Creator’s instruction manual, we have a much better chance of survival.

This is a good time for all of us to ask ourselves, “Am I living in harmony with my Maker’s guidelines in every area of my life?”

Judging others is easy. How about judging ourselves?

Second, we need to remember that all of us live by God’s mercy, and the moment we become righteous in our own eyes, thinking we deserve His favor, we deceive ourselves. That’s why self-righteousness is one of the ugliest sins in God’s sight.

Jesus gave a famous parable to this effect, known as the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (or, Tax Collector).

To put it in contemporary terms, a well-dressed, rich, Christian man was walking into his church building on a Sunday morning when he noticed a homeless man lying on the street, barely conscious and mumbling under his breath.

The Christian said to himself, “God, I thank you that I am not like this wretch. I have not made a mess of my life. I have not had a drink in more than 30 years. I go to church faithfully. And I give away more money to the poor every year than this bum has made in his lifetime.”

As for the homeless man, he was actually mumbling a prayer, saying, “God, I’m not worthy of Your mercy. I’ve destroyed everything through my foolish choices. But a preacher told me yesterday that Jesus could save even me. So, Lord, because of Jesus, have mercy on me!”

According to Jesus Himself, it was the homeless man who was justified in God’s sight that day, not the wealthy Christian man.

Will California Legislate Medical Child Abuse without Parental Consent?

It sounds too ghastly to be true, but it is true. If California Bill SB 107 becomes law, as the bill currently stands, California could become a 'sanctuary state' for minors wanting puberty blockers and sex-change surgery, even without parental consent. “SB 107 may be the most brazen assault on fundamental parental rights in the history of this state.” This bill opens the door wide for thousands of kids to make terrible, life-altering decisions, even against their parents’ wishes. It is a brutal attack on children.

Will California Legislate Medical Child Abuse without Parental Consent? | Article | AskDrBrown

It sounds too ghastly to be true, but it is true. 

If California Bill SB 107 becomes law, as the bill currently stands, California could become a sanctuary state for minors wanting puberty blockers and sex-change surgery, even without parental consent. In the words of Attorney Matthew McReynolds of the Pacific Justice Institute, “SB 107 may be the most brazen assault on fundamental parental rights in the history of this state.”

In short, a trans-identifying child unable to receive hormone treatments or undergo irreversible sex-change surgery in the state in which they live would be able to flee to California and be treated under the protection of the state.

Health

A Major Scientific Study Confirms (What We All Knew): Men ARE Different than Women

Woe to Those Who Call Evil 'Good' and Good 'Evil'

This Doctor Is Willing to Destroy a Child’s Future to Keep Them Happy for the Moment

Short-Term Gratification vs Long-Term Satisfaction

How ‘Gender Confirmation’ Surgery Confirms There Are Only Two Genders

Monkeypox, STDs, Violating God’s Divine Order, and Receiving Mercy

Will California Legislate Medical Child Abuse without Parental Consent?

Have We Reached ‘Peak Woke’?

Rosaria Butterfield Renounces Her Rejection of Sexual Orientation Change Efforts

Justice Jackson, Are You a Woman?

Will America Soon Face a Gambling Epidemic?

Why is Senator Elizabeth Warren Declaring War on Pregnancy Crisis Centers?

Fat Is Not Fit

Fentanyl Is Killing Our Young People

Christian Leaders, Please Do Not Publicly Celebrate Your Liberty to Drink

Isn’t This More Dangerous Than Alleged Vaccine Misinformation?

‘This Is [Expletive] America’: Dana White Pushes Back Against Cancel Culture

A Suggestion for Joe Rogan that Could Educate the Masses

COVID, Fear, and Demons

Sickness Is an Enemy

Thoughts on Australia’s Decision to Deport Tennis Star Novak Djokovic

Totally Candid Reflections on the COVID Vaccinations

So, I Finally Got COVID

Once Again, the Greek Word Pharamakia in Revelation 18:23 Does Not Refer to Big Pharma

Is It True that the Book of Revelation Indicts Big Pharma?

With Word of New COVID Variants, God’s Message Again is Fear Not

Why the Heavy-Handed Mandate Bullying?

We Must Never Get Used to the New Cultural Craziness

I Warned that Doctors were Experimenting with Transgender Children. Now a Leading Transgender Doctor is Sounding the Alarm

When Parents Became the Enemy

Never Underestimate the Power of Greed

Did You Hear About the Latest Moral Outrage from California?

Why YouTube’s Banning of Anti-Vaxxers is So Ominous

Analyzing the Election Results in California and Canada, and the Attitude of Faith vs Fear

From ‘Let Them Eat Cake’ to ‘Let Them Wear Masks’

The Real Attack Against Our Children

An Open Letter to Women Say ‘My Body, My Choice’

What Makes this 91-Year-Old Man So Energetic and Full of Life?

Why a Virginia Middle School is Removing Urinals from the Boys’ Bathrooms

We Were Here When Medical Science Lost its Mind