Merely by avoiding the acts, not having sex, being "chaste," they can avoid "sin," as the Church defines it. This seems to be your idea, please correct me if I am wrong.
Let's see what the Catechism says. First, the paragraph we have already looked at.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
Homosexuals are called to chastity. Havoc thinks this means merely avoiding the physical acts. That one can be as gay as he wants, immerse himself in gayness, just not do the acts and he is "chaste."
But let's look at the end of that paragraph. "They can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection." Wow. This doesn't sound like an approval to be gay, without the acts. This sounds like a call to avoid all sin, all enjoyment of sin, all desire of sin. "Christian perfection." Wow.
That doesn't sound like one can be in a homosexual lifestyle and be resoultely approaching Christian perfection. Wonder why Havoc and the other Catholic detractors missed this?
SD
2341 The virtue of chastity comes under the cardinal virtue of temperance, which seeks to permeate the passions and appetites of the senses with reason.
Chastity is a form of temperance. There's an old fashioned word. It seeks to permeate the passions and appetites with reason. That means that man learns self-control, he is no longer a slave to his appetites.
Now would a man who was "chaste," no longer a slave to his passions immerse himself in a "lifestyle" which celebrate a peculiar sin? Does this make any sense? Chastity seems to forbid reveling in ones sin, but rather is a mastery of the passions which enslave.
SD