When you talk about homosexuality being more than sexual acts, are you talking about the raging queens dancing in drag shows? Or somebody like J. Edgar Hoover who is outwardly very homophobic while hiding (a la Jimmy Swaggart) the very act he pretends to despise? Because if you are, then I agree with you.
But if a priest is completely celibate (and by that I include NOT fondling anybody, much less a child) and fulfills his function, what more can they hope for? Will they borrow from the scientologists and hook crude lie detectors up to them and ask them increasingly personal and sexual questions?
Ultimately I think most of the men who choose to be priests and thereby choose to forsake sexuality are going by the very nature of the decision to have issues with sexuality, and it doesn't make much sense to me to classify them as sexual at all (assuming they are honest in fulfilling their celibacy).
Your comment shows that your conception of sexual orientation has to do only with 'functionality,' that is, which orifice is selected.
Homosexuality is a grave disorder which is manifested in a number of ways, ONE of which is homosexual activity (in some cases.)
It is erroneous to focus only on genital activity (or lack thereof.)