If one has a choice to resist those temptations, one can also choose to fall into them. That being said, you should ask anyone who argues this point what it would take for them to fall into that temptation and become a full-on flaming homosexual themself. Ask it like a used-car salesman. "What would it take for you to become a cross-dressing-sodomizer?" Corduroy jeans? Some polyester shirts? Some Barry Manilow albums? Be specific. Also be sure to point that if they've ever masturbated they're already on the slippery slope to full-on homosexuality according to Spencer W. Kimball. They'll then argue that under no circumstances could they ever be compelled to be gay. Just point out that if its a choice, they could eventually come up with enough good reasons themselves to start wearing assless chaps and hanging out in bars with names like "The Velvet Spike". Keep pressing the question. What would it take? Some white wine, watching Bravo for several hours a day?
Eventually they'll be forced to admit that it has nothing to do with being tempted. They'll never be gay because they're not attracted to the same sex. It's at this point you can yell "Bingo!" and point out the obvious.

Even at RFM we think straight or gay. I think there are a lot of bisexuals who understand Same Sex Attractions but are able to choose a monogomous hetero relationship.

Is gender defined by how someone looks physically?
If this is the case then if a gay man had a sex change to look like a woman, would it be ok for them to have sex with a man? No? Why not? Because they cannot produce children? Not all women or men are fertile. Does that mean they are genderless?

Is gender defined by a person's chromosomes?
If this is the case then people like those in this image:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Orchids01.JPG
who have the XY chromosomes, but is physically like a woman and has been since birth, should marry another woman and hold the priesthood?

How about people whose physical appearance is somewhere in between male and female?

How about people whose chromosomes is somewhere in between male and female? XXY or XYY.

Which gender should they marry?

I think Mormons think gender is cut and dry. That there are only two possible options. If this is true then it is easy to judge by appearance and believe that a person with certain body parts should follow that gender role. If gender is not that clear cut how do you decide which role a person should follow? How do you know what behavior is sinful and unnatural? If you can't then you should just throw up your hands and let people decide for themselves who they are. They are the only one in a position to judge what gender they belong to.

@ Taddlywog. You are correct.

I am a bisexual female that is in a heterosexual marriage. My preference for both sexes has been existent since a little bit before puberty and sexual thoughts of any kind started to enter my head. I was a Tom Boy as a child and always played with the boys, but the same sex attraction arrived at the same time as the opposite sex attraction did. Before that time, it seems as though I was pretty much innocent and oblivious to such things. Before I was married, I had many relations with men and women when I was inactive in the church, in my late teens and early 20's. I know for a fact that I could make either relationship work without a hitch. I am attracted to both equally and the same. But because I live in Idaho and in a highly LDS populated area, I chose the route with less stigma behind it and decided to only date men, especially after I became active again, for obvious reasons. I still have attraction towards both sexes and my husband is aware of this. My family is not, and I don't plan on telling them anytime soon, especially after how they reacted when I told them I was leaving the church after finding out its true history.

So, in my opinion, I don't think there is any possible way to overcome same-sex "temptation" if you are bisexual or homosexual. As a married woman, I actually find women in shows, in the store, on the street, and in magazines far more stimulating than the men. It is just the way I am and the way I always have been. I don't plan on changing it. When I was a super active LDS, I just had to lie about it. I repented for the stuff I had done in my late teens and early 20's, but after being married I acted like it wasn't an issue. They didn't bring it up again and neither did I. I don't think anything could change me, like the church would like everyone to believe.

My son has been dating his girlfriend for almost 2 years. She is very likeable, we have met her parents. My natural fear is she has twice the temptation to stray from the relationship. I think it is riskier to have a relationship/children with a bisexual person. My son does not have this fear, he has listened to my concern and told me it is silly. What it comes down to is monogomy.

I kind of think if there is any truth to the suggestion that Packer's passion for this topic is because he has same sex attraction it is because he is bisexual. If he made a choice he thinks everyone else can.

I like this video the church allowed a few years ago, I say "allowed" because the film makers were not chased off temple square. It is suprisingly enlightened, in comparison to Packer's talk, and acknowledges that some people really do not have a choice in sexual attraction... and would not be good candidates for heterosexual marriage. But it falls short in that it promotes people with same sex attraction deny themselves the happiness and fullfillment that comes from a commited loving relationship. I find part 2 very poignant, and I found myself wishing Russ a happily ever after. I don't know if it's true, but I heard a rummor that he did get married in California before Prop 8 passed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmMd6sOMams&feature=related