On the other hand, this is being treated as a political coup. I'm not really sure why. I've always been opposed to what I call "The Biological Excuse", e.g., "You must accept my sexual preference because I have no control over it," is a very weak grounds for social change. I much prefer, "You must accept my sexual preference because it's none of your goddamn business."
Never mind the unintended consequences of such a claim. By focusing so strongly on the biological basis, you're turning it from a choice into a condition. If a lack or surplus of androgen during development can cause homosexuality, doesn't that give us a chance to eradicate it in the next generation? I'm not advocating such a thing, mind. But some people would.
One must face facts. That means the biological basis for all human behavior must be accepted. That means accepting, no matter how unpalatable it may seem, the fact that every action we perform arises from nothing more than some very chaotic chemistry. We can't ignore the real world.
I'm not claiming these results are false or should be ignored, but I think there is a large community that has viewed the biological basis of sexual orientation as some sort of holy grail of justifications. That has always been a mistake, because it doesn't address the social implications. The biological basis is irrelevant to social change, but if our knowledge of the biological sources advances more quickly than our social wisdom- then we have a problem.