Same rule no matter what your "orientation" is.
I know that gay people seeking to avoid sin and live in a truly Christian manner, can experience several outcomes as regards their sexual feelings:
*Some* people in any of these three points may actually be able to succeed in a real man-woman marriage, no matter where they are on the "spectrum." So-called "Ex-Gay-Bisexual" Robert Oscar Lopez seems to be in this category, and has done some very thoughtful writing about it.
But I wouldn't want to imply that EVERY gay guy could turn heterosexual if he really, really wanted. That is just not the case.
Some just have deep-seated desire they have to resist all their lives, and cannot even experience attraction to a person of the opposite sex. In any case, I say God bless them, it's a cross to bear--- and we all have "crosses," don't we?
I’m not sure what this was supposed to be, a roundabout complete endorsement of that catechism item?
It does not say chastity. If it did, there would be nothing more to discuss from a biblical point of view.
Crosses are the burdens that Christians endure for the sake of bringing blessings into the world. They can evolve, and should be expected to evolve as a Christian passes into greater maturity.
To paint a problem with this sin as some kind of static lifetime judgment really does not do God justice. God blesses according to faith. If you keep preaching static lifetime judgment, then the faith is not there.
This is one of the areas that Wascally Evangelicals have been more open about. Unconstrained by a church opinion that you have to bear the scarlet H, they allow for God’s mutability of their condition.