Why would anyone else want to call attention to it? Jake seems to be doing a pretty good job of it all by himself.
And in the course of doing so, he completely misrepresents the text of the Senate Bill 68, which would, as David Edmunds accurately stated it in Saturday's Louisville Courier-Journal, place foster and adoptive children "in homes where there is no live-in sexual partner — either homosexual or heterosexual."
"Not true," says Jake, who apparently needs a pair of glasses in addition to remedial training in basic English. The proposed legislation targets gays specifically because it would, as he quotes the language in the bill:
[P]rohibit the approval of foster care, relative caregiver services, or adoption of a child by an applicant who is cohabiting with a sexual partner outside of a marriage that is legally valid in Kentucky… [emphasis Jake's]The italicized section, he says, is proof that it targets gays. No, he offers no other evidence than this: language which clearly does not target gays.
Would someone please inform Jake that two straight people shacking up without being married, in addition to not being the greatest arrangement in the world for raising children (as the social science on the matter has shown again and again), IS NOT A LEGALLY VALID MARRIAGE IN KENTUCKY?
Now we're pretty sure that Jake will respond with something he perceives to be an argument, and we're pretty sure that it will involve bringing up gay pedophilia again.