In response to

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=233781&boardID=12&page=1

=================================================

First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

==========================================
But, as most people scream "freedom of speech," very few have read the first amendment.  It was designed so congress could not pass a law to stop free speech or religion.  It has nothing to do with a business' right to "not" publish something.

There was a court case in Boston about ten years ago regarding a decision made by a private organization to exclude supporters of gay rights from marching under their (gay rights, that is) banner at the annual St. Patrick's Day parade that this private organization sponsors each year.

The case went to federal court which ruled that if this private organization was forced to include points of view that were alien to their own, it would be a violation of that organization's own right of free speech.

This decision was regarded as counter intuitive by many.  After all, how is allowing the supporters of gay rights to be banned from a march a demonstration of "freedom of speech"?

I am a supporter of freedom of speech and of gay rights, but I felt that the case was decided wisely.  What person, in the act of expressing what they feel is their point of view, should be required by law to include points of view that they disagree with?

The upshot was that other organizations that share the cause of gay rights organized their own St. Patrick's Day parade in a nearby locale and in some respects, that parade is receiving more publicity that the original parade.  For example, many politicians have begun to shun the original parade and march with the "gay rights" St. Patrick Day parade so they would be seen as inclusive.

I think it has worked out for the best.

I'm surprised a Clinton came up with it.

--b.

Al Gore invented it! LOL