I've deliberately made this separate from the other thread, although it is connected in a way.
Many of us are familiar with the theory that gender/sexual identity is defined in utero as a result of the hormones that we are exposed to. My question is this: If the hormonal imbalance was correctible, should it be? My argument in favour of this would be that we would do the same if it was any other correctible condition - babies that are born without immune systems can be given thymus transplants, for example - so why should gender/sexual identity be treated any differently? Put another way, if we had congenital heart defects that could be corrected before birth, would we be arguing that it's one of nature's quirks and, as such, should be left as-is or even celebrated?
I hope I don't upset people unnecessarily, although I've a feeling that I will. Sorry in advance - I'm just trying to guage people's opinions here.