No anthology of misguided prognostications would be complete without one from Michael Heath, the recently departed director of the Maine Family Policy Council. In 1997, Heath told the Press Herald gay rights would threaten the civil liberties of anyone "that decline[s] to celebrate homosexuality."
Whoopee, I'm celebrating. Don't take away my liberties.
All these quotations would amount to nothing more than historical examples of the human capacity for grievous error if much of this rhetoric wasn't being echoed in the current debate over same-sex marriage. Bob Emrich of Plymouth, one of the leaders of Stand for Marriage Maine, recently told the Press Herald that marital equality would require "explicit homosexual instruction in the classroom."
Too bad that's not true. It would liven up health class.
Tim Russell of the Maine Jeremiah Project wrote a Press Herald op-ed in which he claimed allowing same-sex weddings "would mean there is no logical, philosophical or legally rational basis for prohibiting people who want multiple wives, multiple husbands or any combination thereof from marrying."
Except, maybe, common sense.
Finally, there's the TV spot in which a Boston College law professor foresees "a flood of lawsuits against individuals, small businesses and religious groups; church organizations could lose their tax-exempt status; homosexual marriage taught in public schools whether parents like it or not."
Do all law profs have such lousy grammar?
And are they all as bad as economists at predictions?
My crystal ball shows you e-mailing me firstname.lastname@example.org. Don't bother. I've already read it.