Gender is a social construct. I’m very wary indeed of declaring a preference for a certain socially defined set of behaviors as being somehow “innate”. It strains credulity to assert these children acquired their gender identification ex nihilo. If you mean that they weren’t coached to “be girls”, that’s one thing, but if you mean they were “born into the wrong biological body”, um… that’s a bit harder to swallow when the “wrongness” is purely in relation to a mutable social construct.
It is very difficult to understand how the “reality-based scientific” people can support the position that some people are “born” transgendered or gay. If they are physically male or female, any “gender identity” is in their heads. How is that different from the scientific atheist rant against theists, that their God is only in their heads?
There are many ways in which non-scientific Christians are positivistic, meaning that they believe in a single, discoverable reality that completely explains everything. This is philosophically the same as the atheist scientific materialist view of reality. However, scientific materialism becomes corrupted when it becomes associated with political positions that require ethical justifications, which explains why many so-called materialists believe in unsupportable myths that are politically popular.