Scott--not a question, well--maybe it is. More of a clarification, I guess. You wrote:

when the culture proclaims that there is a "gay gene" (and that is not my phrase, but a phrase used in many journals and magazines), it does me no good to say: "But the Bible says ..." This is an issue of apologetics. Culture isn't concerned with what the Bible says. So we talk in a languauge -- in this case, the language of science ...

I follow your train of thought... but the areas of science and religion really can't mix. They're like oil and water. One is faith based, the other is evidence based. Thus, any argument in one isn't seen as valid in the other. (As you pointed out.) Is this what apologetics tries to do? Merge Science and Religion? If that's the case, then... well, good luck. It will never work. If an apologist attempts to base or associate his religious belief or perspective on an infintile paradigmatic understanding (such as the human genome)--then I'll just stand back, watch the train wreck, and laugh about it. So much of science is fabricated marketing and intellectual masterbation; scientific revolutions happen all the time.

I understand it's a culture war--so that part, I get. Public skepticism of the mythical gay-gene to counter the liberal agenda is a noble cause. But the infusion of science and religion relative to the great commission just seems antithetical.