And you think that therefore the author is saying we should naturally rework all the laws in our nation so that we can prioritize that natural addiction and make it the center of our life?

I don’t think that is what the author was saying.

I think the author was urging us NOT to be slaves to our passions, but to give in to passion only when it is appropriate.

Now, whether or not it’s appropriate for gays to be with each other (monogamously or not) is a question I simply don’t know the answer to. But even if it were true that gays should (a) be with each other and (b) be monogamous, that has nothing to do with the marriage debate, unless one has specific assumptions about the purpose of marriage that basically produce a tautology.

And the rules of logic say you can’t use your conclusion as a premise to support your conclusion. It doesn’t follow logically.

But I think you’re missing the point here, and its a very interesting point. The author is basically saying we are all drug addicts because sexual pleasure is a ‘natural high’….the word ‘natural’ doesn’t alter the fact that its a high. In one shot she instantly makes sense of the fact that many religions have had a cult of celibacy and also shoots down the meme that ‘marriage is about children’. She is saying that to the degree we engage in any sexual pleasure at all, we are likely to become addicts hence if we are going down that road better to go down the ‘methadone clinic’ road rather than ‘shooting up in the back ally’. SSM shares the trait wish DSM of being a more positive place to channel ‘sex addiction’ than ‘the hookup culture’

I don’t think anyone is arguing that gay people “choose” to feel homosexual desires (just as presumably nobody “chooses” to lust after dead bodies, small children, siblings, beasts, or anything else, appropriate or not – the whole point of lust is that it is an appetite, and beyond the control).

But whether gay sex is normal, natural, inevitable, good, or bad, has nothing to do with the question of whether their union is or can ever be the same as a marriage.

You’re welcome to believe that the differences between “same sex marriage” vs. real marriage are insignificant, but you’re not welcome to mandate that I believe they’re insignificant, because it’s quite demonstrable that these differences are not in fact insignificant.