Tens of thousands of former homosexuals do recall just that.
IMO, stating it's a choice, no matter what side of the debate you're on is probably the wrong word to use. Is the attraction issue a choice - it's complicated. But it's always a choice to engage in homosexuality (behavior). And tens of thousands of former homosexuals testify that homosexuals can change.
Even Dr. Robert Spitzer changed his mind on the issue, and now states homosexuals can change.
You know tens of thousands of former homosexuals?
There aren't tens of thousands of former homosexuals.
Here you are mixing two arguments.
One can decide to either engage or not engage in any action that's not involuntary (can't decide to not breathe). So rather than discussing what the tens of thousands of former homosexuals say, the more accurate thing would be discussing the fact that tens of thousands of homosexuals have decided not to engage in the homosexual act any longer.
Monks make a similar decision.
One more thing.
People are debating the ONE factor which decides whether you are a homosexual or not...I don't think anyone will ever come up with ONE factor.
That's the main thing I don't buy about "Homosexuality is a choice". There are obviously people who are strongly physically attracted to members of their own sex. I have many faults but this is one problem I have never had.
I have a baby son. One day at the age of five months he was in the waiting room of a doctor's office and he was staring at a beautiful little blonde girl. When she left the room he burst into tears. When she came back he was all smiles. Since then he has often shown a flirtatious interest in girls. Similarly he is clearly interested in boy-type toys. He always lunges for channel changers. He likes it when male family members play a little roughly with him. He has no interest in the pink aisle at Toys-R-Us. As a number of people have pointed out, you can already tell that he will not turn out to be gay.
When I was young there was a little boy living next door to us who was often seen carrying dolls and had no interest in more typically male pursuits. You could tell that he would likely grow up to be gay. I have heard of other cases like this where these boys were followed until adulthood and did indeed turn out to be gay.
I don't know whether there are always signs of ultimate sexual identity in early childhood, but clearly this is often the case. Gay people I have known and accounts I have read describe very early preferences for members of the same sex. These people did not just "decide to adopt a lifestyle". The attraction was present first. It isn't necessarily sexual at first. When they were young they fell in love with members of the same sex.
Some people try to adopt a definition of homosexuality that says you are not gay if you do not engage in homosexual acts, even if you feel tempted. I don't think this is accurate. I would like to propose a clearer definition:
1. If you are sexually attracted only to members of the opposite sex, you are heterosexual.
2. If you are sexually attracted only to members of your own sex, you are gay.
3. If you are sexually attracted to members of both sexes, you are bisexual. This may occur in various degrees.
If someone claims to be an ex-gay and to no longer engage in homosexual behavior, but they still are sexually attracted to members of their own sex, they are still gay or bisexual.
It is my impression that people who say that being gay is just a choice probably feel attracted to their own sex to some degree. For truly heterosexual people this concept of being able to choose another sexual identity does not make any sense.