No. That's YOUR logic and YOUR definition.
Wrong. Logic is not subjective. That's why it's logic.
As such, there is no such thing as "my" logic, or "your" logic.
Logic dictates the definition, as I've explained many times. Stop getting angry at me because I'm the one that decided to enlighten you that YOUR definition of the word doesn't fit with logic.
My logical definition of homosexual is someone who is attracted to those of the same sex.
If your definition was logical, the reasoning behind it would hold up across the board. In case after case, however, we find that it doesn't do any such thing. I gave several examples, but the simplest one I gave was how we do not arrest people for thinking about committing a crime, but we might if they take action to commit a crime. If your definition was logical, we would be arresting people for merely considering a crime.
Calling your definition logical is just showing you don't understand what logic is.
I disagree. Who you are attracted is what defines your sexuality. That's the logical definition.
This shows you also do not understand the concept of logic.
Logic is not what makes sense to you personally, as you seem to think.
Logic is not subjective. One aspect of logical means you can apply the same reasoning behind the opinion to other situations and have the same result.
As I already stated, that doesn't work with your opinion, because the reasoning behind it doesn't apply to other situations. In fact, your reasoning is so illogical it's essentially a joke. Here, I'll make fun of it again, just as I already did:
Your logic says people's "feelings" are what matters, while what they do is irrelevant to their status. I'll just go ahead and apply that same line of reasoning elsewhere:
Why should anyone have to commit a crime before we arrest them and charge them with it? Why can't we just arrest people based upon the fact that they thought about doing it?
Why do I need to go to sleep? Why can't I just desire sleep and be done with it?
Why eat either? It's a waste of time. The fact that I'd like to eat is enough that I don't actually have to take the action of eating to be nourished, right?
Also, I'd like to be a billionaire, but maybe I won't do anything to earn any money. I'm attracted to money and that should be enough, because actions don't matter.
Again, don't hate me just because I'm the one who took the time to enlighten you to the fact that your reasoning isn't logical.