While I may not agree with what they seem to be promoting, I still do not it is covered by the ban. Let me turn the tables around for a second. Down here in the diocese of Arlington there are some folks who were trying to investigate the bishop and see why he would think of defrocking a priest who went to a deposition because he was required to. More details are at the RCF Web site.
Sometimes, given the retaliatory nature of certain prelates when caught, people will naturally want their identities hidden so it doesn't affect their relationships, jobs, and family life so much when the prelate goes on the offensive.
Now, I'm not saying this to hate, but rather agreeing with the Church when it reaffirmed that there can be no gay priests (can you imagine the many occasions of sin in the seminaries and such)? Now, if the post-conciliar church wants to have gay priests, fine, that's their religion and they can do whatever. Consequently, if these folks want to protest the oppression just for being who they are, then it would be reasonable for them to do so. After all, no bishop should be going on a witch hunt for certain people because they're suspected of a being of a certain nationality, right?
I don't know what their motives are, but it seems like it's more of an affirmative action deal than a plot to overthrow the Church like the Masons would do. On an objective spiritual side they're still living in sin, but again, that's a different subject.