The U.K.’s The Times has a remarkable article by a four-one year old pilot named Patrick Muirhead that contains one of the most surprising titles I’ve ever seen in a mainstream newspaper: “The day I decided to stop being gay”
Choosing an excerpt that does justice to the piece is difficult so I encourage you to simply read it in its entirety.
Although I’ve heard similar stories before—mostly from friends in the “ex-gay” movement—they have all been motivated, in some part, by Christian beliefs. If Muirhead was motivated at all by faith, he doesn’t mention it. Instead, his decision to, as he says, “stop being gay,” was based on a response to natural law or common grace. The primary motivation for Muirhead is a desire to be a father. He wants to have a child “the old-fashioned way”—by nature’s means of procreation rather than by the laboratory’s path of reproduction.
Muirhead’s article is refreshingly candid and personal. While he makes some extrapolations from his own experience, he doesn’t try to argue a larger political or sociological point. He mostly relates his own story, sharing his aspirations, desires, and motives, and explaining how they conflict. It is a shockingly clear-eyed assessment and a reminder that no matter what innate desires might orient our choices, we are ultimately responsible for how we choose to live.
Muirhead appears to be an extraordinary man—which is quite a shame. The world would be a much better place if all men—whether gay or straight—shared his affection for the natural family.
January 21st, 2010 | 10:00 am
I wouldn’t be so quick to canonize him. You are correct, we are responsible for how we choose to live, but the sexual orientation itself is not a choice. He is homosexual, and that is not a choice. What is a choice is how he acts on it. I don’t think for a gay man to choose to find a woman with whom he can sire an offspring is really what we want to put forth as an example of “respect for the human family.” Even the part about where he speaks of going to the bar and flirting with a woman, it just seems like he’s trying to find a woman willing to be his child bearer. That’s great for the rest of the animal kingdom, but it’s got nothing to do with the human ideal of marriage.
Needless to say, I’m rather leery about this entire story.
January 21st, 2010 | 10:40 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by First Things, La Crosse Catholic. La Crosse Catholic said: RT @ROFTERS: Choosing fatherhood over homosexuality http://bit.ly/4ynXbq [...]
January 21st, 2010 | 12:50 pm
I agree that while his ennobling moment of understanding the importance of fatherhood was moving, there was also something mercenary in his subsequent pursuit of women.
But these kinds of stories prolong my confusion about advocacy for a “protected class” status under the law for gays and lesbians. Orientation is for the most part invisible, and falls across a spectrum. While certainly homosexuality is immutable for some, others can move between relationships with men and women. I understand the aims of the equal rights advocates, but for the law to treat such a diverse group as a single category, when it depends on self-identification (as opposed to race), is a confusing prospect.
January 21st, 2010 | 2:22 pm
I blogged about that a couple of days ago. As a Christian on a post-gay journey myself, I liked the article too… highly recommend it.
January 21st, 2010 | 5:45 pm
It appears that it’s considered legitimate – not ideal. perhaps, but within a person’s rights – to change from homo- to heterosexual as long as they don’t attribute it to religion. David Bowie, Lou Reed, Louis Nowra, Anne Heche can all “go straight” and stay respectable, provided they present it as a matter of inidividual taste rather than religious duty.
January 21st, 2010 | 8:56 pm
Unfortunately the headline is misleading as Patrick Muirhead freely admits: “Does this mean that I no longer like men? No, of course not, and I won’t pretend.” He did choose to be in a heterosexual marriage, so a more accurately headline might have been “The day I decided to live like a straight man.”
January 22nd, 2010 | 5:50 am
Rod, all the celebrities you name are bisexual; in fact I dont think any of them ever identified as gay, or “decided to go straight.” It is more likely that the homosexual sex was the experimentation.
I agree with the people who say his pursuit of women is problematic. If the previous experience of many many homosexuals is a guide, he will be able to consummate the marriage, maybe even enjoy sex with his wife, but his true passion will always be for men. If she doesnt know that at first (if he doesn’t tell her) she will find out eventually and feel deeply betrayed, rightfully so. It’s not fair to her, unless he is upfront about his situation before they get involved. Otherwise the marriage will be one long lie.
January 22nd, 2010 | 4:24 pm
If the guy makes a good husband and father, I’m all for it. The guy makes it clear in the article that he is committed to doing so. If regular straight parents made the same commitment, there would be a lot less screwed up kids in this world and we would be the better of it. I say more power to this guy. I do not understand the criticism of him that I read here.
January 23rd, 2010 | 7:58 pm
So, would you approve of his becoming a Catholic priest if he wanted to do so?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact