So, when someone is born with a birth defect, let's say that he/she has both male and female genitalia, is that not a disorder?  Where did it come from?  Our fallen nature is subject to disorders.  

Ontologically, the hermaphrodite still has either an exclusive masculine (male) or feminine (female) soul, despite the physical birth defect. The soul created by God has no ambiguity in its nature & identity. Hermaphroditism is no different than being born with no limbs or any other grotesque disfiguration, but it's no reflection of the soul of the person.

The parents & priest of the hermaphrodite must pray, fast and give alms for the child in his formative years so the child, parents & priest may finally discern the actual sex of the person according to his soul, and proceed to corrective physical surgery. This is not the same as the mortal sin of the grotesque perversion of "transitioning".

And don't tell me souls have no masculine (male) or feminine (female) nature. St. Michael the Archangel is named "Michael" because of his masculine (male) soul, despite not having a physical body.

So, when someone is born with a birth defect, let's say that he/she has both male and female genitalia, is that not a disorder?  Where did it come from?  Our fallen nature is subject to disorders.  In fact, our fallen nature IS a disorder.  God did not INTEND for us to struggle with concupiscence or irascibility, but we are born with these anyway.  Similarly, while God did not INTEND that human beings be born with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ inclinations, that disorder could theoretically happen also without any act of the will.

Due to our fallen nature, we all have unnatural sɛҳuąƖ urges to some degree, you're right in that.  ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs and the like, however, are the ones that give into them completely.  They spend their lives corrupting the national spirit of the nations they inhabit, as well as the individuals within said nations, and deserve no mercy unless they repent.  Nearly all of the sɛҳuąƖ depravity everywhere in Western culture was started by the catalyst of indifference towards ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.

Homo says what?

Old "Francis", or whatever his name, is a fag! Faggy Vatican II, bad Vatican II! Bad Vatican II no doubt about it.

Do we have evidence that Pope Francis actually said this?

Does anyone here think this is some form of opening salvo to start the ground work for the celebration of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in the Conciliar Church and to eventually allow same-sex weddings in the Novus Ordo?  Most big and deviant changes start as whispers to see how the faithful react.  Well, Pope Francis has been hinting and also dropping bombs since 2013.

If they do that, there will be a schism within the Novus Ordo

That wasn't my point.  I was making an analogy between disorders that someone might theoretically be born with.  It's possible in our fallen nature to be born with certain disorders, possibly even ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity.  So, for instance, they've noticed that various lower life forms become ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ when subjected to certain types of chemicals in their environment.  That's all I was saying.

Theoretically born with or without? Perhaps a privation of some hormone/gene; privation of some good.

Let's say that some people have certain genetic things that incline them to go this way, since unfortunately we're starting to see ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity even among animals who have been exposed to various kinds of chemicals and whatnot.  So is it possible that some people were born with those inclinations ... due to hormonal imbalances.  Yes, it is.  But even then, it's a DISORDER that needs to be treated as such.  Similarly, some people are born with genetic deformities, birth defects, etc. ... this doesn't mean that they're natural and the traits intended by God.

So the problem I have with his statement is the fact that he's saying that God loves him this way.  God loves him DESPITE his disordered/sinful inclinations, just as you would love someone who had birth defects.  But that's where the similarity with birth defects ends ... because if the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖly-inclined man acts out on it, then it's a sin that displeases and offends God.  So too heterosɛҳuąƖs who sin with the opposite sex displease and offend God as well.

So this man on the chair is a bumbling idiot.

He said it's ok to be gαy. He didn't say it's ok to go out and commit all kinds of abominations. God loves all of us. If He didn't love this person then he would cease to exist. All of us have crosses to carry. In the case of the man born blind the disciples asked if it was his own sin or the sins of his parents that caused this situation. Jesus said that it was in order that the glory of God might be manifest.   

Does God give birth defects to people that would almost always cause them to commit mortal sin and go to Hell? 

But, the examples you give are of people with birth defects that prevent them from being culpable of sin for the most part. Pope Francis gave great scandal by appearing to condone the sin of sodomy rather than both reassuring the man that God loves him - but also telling him that he must confess his mortal sin and discontinue it.

The same sex attraction is also a defect but of a different order. It can be an invisible defect that you would know nothing about unless that person makes some sort of revelation or in some way acts it out. One should never act out in this sinful way. But then who knows? that person could be more holy in the eyes of God by resisting this temptation to sin in this way than we like to think we are.