Not true. The Supreme Court has long upheld that private establishments may
not refuse service to people on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, age,
or beliefs. They have long ago expanded this to include exercise of one's
right of Free Speech. (The "Fire!" exclusion not included).

There are exceptions to this naturally.

In one notable case in point in Florida, a man was refused service in a
prominent restaurant because he wrote a controversial column in a local
magazine. The man sued the restaurant and lost, but was upheld on appeal to
the federal district court of appeals on the basis of discrimination. The
argument on the side of the restaurant was that having the man as a customer
offended their other customers because they knew what he had written and
that writing offended them. The court upheld that this was not sufficient
reason to bar him from an otherwise public place, nor to refuse him service.

Wish I could remember the exact case from my law class but unfortunately
that was 12 years ago.

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.langlois@... [mailto:mike.langlois@...]
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 2:27 PM
To: eqbards@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [eqbards] OT: A Warning...

Actually, Free Speech says that the government cannot prevent you from
speaking. It has nothing to do with private enterprise or personal
communications.

It means that the law cannot be used to stop you from voicing your
opinions.

It's a common misconception that Free Speech means that in America the law
says that you must be allowed to say anything in any place.

Golias

===========Original Post==================

Hopefully someone has posted this to the FAC board. They are a group that
actively fights First Amendment Abridgements pro bono. I can't find the
link or I would post it myself. Obviously Verant has never heard of Larry
Flynt or they probably would have taken a different course in this case.

Please send submissions for the eqbards newsletter to lol@...
with the subject submissions.