I can’t tell if I’m misinterpreting your post, but I’m gonna respond anyway, so just take this with a grain of salt.
I think the difference between what we as a society define as a disability vs an illness is about whether it’s harmful to yourself or others. Like for example, by this logic genetically predisposed depression could be considered a disability because ones brain struggles to produce serotonin and other endorphins, but it’s not: it’s a mental illness. Someone born without a leg has a disability because their body cannot function like it’s supposed to, and needs aid to function at the normal level (usually). Now I’m not saying these are textbook definitions but there are clear connotations as to when we use “illness” vs “disability”.
Pedophilia is harmful to others, full stop. Acting on urges physically or viewing child porn is harmful, full stop. I’d argue even having these urges is dangerous to others because it introduces the possibility of either of these happening, but that’s not to say those who need help shouldn’t be able to get it. It would be incredibly beneficial to themselves and society to curb this attraction.
Having a law doesn’t make something an illness, but it doesn’t do so to disability either (not really, besides the eyes of the law for benefits or government involvement). I’m not really sure what you meant in your comment or what you were trying to prove.
Oh and lastly, I know that people will say the same about LGBT+ people, but the actions or even urges for sexual activity between two consenting adults is nowhere near comparable to that of an adult and a child. It didn’t seem like that’s what you were trying to say, but the people you described who’d argue it have no leg to stand on.