I wonder how many of these pizza pledges actually will be honored. Also wonder whether the pizza place owners plan to share their right-wing windfall with their cooks and drivers. Probably not.

 

Since you cited the $$ discrepancy in the gofund accounts, here's something else to chew on ... from the Arnold Schwarzenneger article that I posted earlier:

 

"Both sides of the Indiana debate used Twitter to voice their support, and the result couldn’t be clearer. According to Zignal Labs, as of Wednesday night, #StandWithIndiana had been tweeted 5,571 times. Meanwhile, #BoycottIndiana was tweeted 430,728 times."

 

That tell's me that in addition to being intolerant lefties are also greedy tightwads.

Some links of interest to subject:

 

KY 344

 

Kentucky Revised Statutes - Chapter 344

 

Petition:

 

https://www.change.org/p/amend-the-kentucky-civil-rights-act-to-include-sexual-orientation-gender-identity

 

Interesting case - 'Plaintiff would not take 'Yes' for an answer'

 

Kentucky Business Entity Law: Plaintiff in Civil Rights Act Action Refused to take ?Yes? for an Answer

 

Hands-on Original Case:

 

Official decision issued in Lexington discrimination case

 

Related to Hands-on Original case - Lexington Codes of Ordnances (if link does not go direct simply search 201-99):

 

https://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=11163

 

Here relative portion:

 

Sec. 2-33. Discrimination due to sexual orientation or gender identity.

 

(1)It is the policy of the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government to safeguard all individuals within Fayette County from discrimination in employment, public accommodation, and housing on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, as well as from discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, and age forty and over.

 

(2)For purposes of this section, the provisions of KRS 344.010 (1), (5) through (13) and (16), 344.030 (2) through (5), 344.040, 344.045, 344.050, 344.060, 344.070, 344.080, 344.100, 344.110, 344.120, 344.130, 344.140, 344.145, 344.360(1) through (8), 344.365(1) through (4), 344.367, 344.370(1), (2) and (4), 344.375, 344.380, 344.400 and 344.680, as they existed on July 15, 1998, are adopted and shall apply to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity within Fayette County.

 

(3)The commission shall have jurisdiction to receive, investigate, conciliate, hold hearings and issue orders relating to complaints filed alleging discrimination in employment, public accommodation or housing based on the sexual orientation or gender identity of the complaining party. The commission is authorized to use the powers and procedures listed in sections 2-31 and 2-32 to carry out the purposes of this section, except that KRS 344.385, 344.635 and 344.670 shall not apply to the enforcement of this section.

 

(4) For purposes of this section, "sexual orientation" shall mean an individual's actual or imputed heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality.

 

(5) For purposes of this section, "gender identity" shall mean:

 

(a) Having a gender identity as a result of a sex change surgery; or

 

(b) Manifesting, for reasons other than dress, an identity not traditionally associated with one's biological maleness or femaleness.

 

(6) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent an employer from:

 

(a) Enforcing an employee dress policy which policy may include restricting employees from dress associated with the other gender; or

 

(b) Designating appropriate gender specific restroom or shower facilities.

 

(7) The provisions of this section shall not apply to a religious institution or to an organization operated for charitable or educational purposes, which is operated, supervised, or controlled by a religious corporation, association or society except that when such an institution or organization receives a majority of its annual funding from any federal, state, local or other government body or agency or any combination thereof, it shall not be entitled to this exemption.

 

(Ord. No. 201-99, § 1, 7-8-99)

I wonder how many of these pizza pledges actually will be honored. Also wonder whether the pizza place owners plan to share their right-wing windfall with their cooks and drivers. Probably not.

 

Since you cited the $$ discrepancy in the gofund accounts, here's something else to chew on ... from the Arnold Schwarzenneger article that I posted earlier:

 

"Both sides of the Indiana debate used Twitter to voice their support, and the result couldn’t be clearer. According to Zignal Labs, as of Wednesday night, #StandWithIndiana had been tweeted 5,571 times. Meanwhile, #BoycottIndiana was tweeted 430,728 times."

 

Why would you say the bolded? Why would you assume they would not share any of the funds with their employees? I would think just the opposite. Have you seen them interviewed? They don't come across as anything but nice people to me. The woman was caught off guard by a liberal reporter just looking to make a story and preyed on the right person. These pizza owners seem like very nice people who happen to have strong Christian beliefs. They also said they would serve any gay people in their restaurant, just would not cater a same sex marriage. You act like this family has been screwing its employees with absolutely no basis to think that. I am so happy that after the absolute insane and cruel things thrown at these people that they will actually come out of this OK financially.

 

Don't worry though. If they don't give all the money to charity, I assume there will be reporters demanding to know what they did with the money.

So, what you're saying is that liberals will only talk a cause but won't back it with money? Unless it's other people's money of course.

I simply quoted Arnold Schwarzenegger. Those are the words of the former GOP governor of California. If you don't like he said, take it up with him. Good luck there. My point in post 221 is that money donated is one thing and number of tweets is another.

I simply quoted Arnold Schwarzenegger. Those are the words of the former GOP governor of California. If you don't like he said, take it up with him. Good luck there. My point in post 221 is that money donated is one thing and number of tweets is another.

 

I've got no problem with what he said, seems factual. You are correct that money donated is one thing and number of tweets is another. One requires a bit more commitment to your cause.

That tell's me that in addition to being intolerant lefties are also greedy tightwads.

I thought most fiscal conservatives voted Republican. Ha ha ha. Anyway, this battle in the Great Culture War ain't about money. It's about principle. It's about spreading the word, not some silly online contribution schtick.

Why would you say the bolded? Why would you assume they would not share any of the funds with their employees? I would think just the opposite. Have you seen them interviewed? They don't come across as anything but nice people to me. The woman was caught off guard by a liberal reporter just looking to make a story and preyed on the right person. These pizza owners seem like very nice people who happen to have strong Christian beliefs. They also said they would serve any gay people in their restaurant, just would not cater a same sex marriage. You act like this family has been screwing its employees with absolutely no basis to think that. I am so happy that after the absolute insane and cruel things thrown at these people that they will actually come out of this OK financially.

 

Don't worry though. If they don't give all the money to charity, I assume there will be reporters demanding to know what they did with the money.

How do you know the reporter is a liberal? How do you know the pizza shop owner was caught off-guard? Did she not have the option of saying "no comment"? I wish someone would "prey" on me like that so I could cry "woe is me" like the prophet Jeremiah and end up pocketing three-quarters of a million bucks.

How do you know the reporter is a liberal? How do you know the pizza shop owner was caught off-guard? Did she not have the option of saying "no comment"? I wish someone would "prey" on me like that so I could cry "woe is me" like the prophet Jeremiah and end up pocketing three-quarters of a million bucks.

 

By definition, any reporter/member of the media is filthy liberal intolerant scum.

 

Hope that clears things up.

By definition, any reporter/member of the media is filthy liberal intolerant scum.

 

Hope that clears things up.

 

Papa, I would expect that from Twotoplace but not you. I think 80-90% of print media is liberal - you disagree? Anyway, if you read the article, it is pretty obvious she is liberal. She put at the top of the story the liberal agenda talking points. Buried that the lady said she would serve anyone including gays in her restaurant in the middle of the story. I don't think liberal media types are scum but I do think they have an agenda.

How do you know the reporter is a liberal? How do you know the pizza shop owner was caught off-guard? Did she not have the option of saying "no comment"? I wish someone would "prey" on me like that so I could cry "woe is me" like the prophet Jeremiah and end up pocketing three-quarters of a million bucks.

 

How about answering his questions, then asking yours? I too am interested in how you reached your conclusion.

I thought most fiscal conservatives voted Republican. Ha ha ha. Anyway, this battle in the Great Culture War ain't about money. It's about principle. It's about spreading the word, not some silly online contribution schtick.

 

A conservative doesn't mind spending his own money when the cause is worthy, a liberal doesn't mind spending SOMEONE ELSE'S money when they think the cause is worthy.

There's some exaggeratin' fo effect goin' on up in here.

By definition, any reporter/member of the media is filthy liberal intolerant scum.

 

Hope that clears things up.

 

Check out the reporter bimbette's online footprint.

Didn't a Softball coach in Indiana want to BURN DOWN a pizza place because they supported the bill?

Papa, I would expect that from Twotoplace but not you. I think 80-90% of print media is liberal - you disagree? Anyway, if you read the article, it is pretty obvious she is liberal. She put at the top of the story the liberal agenda talking points. Buried that the lady said she would serve anyone including gays in her restaurant in the middle of the story. I don't think liberal media types are scum but I do think they have an agenda.

 

I am a liberal. I'm intolerant. I'm also a tightwad.

 

I simply take the names that have been given me by those that are much wiser and more tolerant than me. It was out of line to try to apply them as well. I should leave that to others.