[Lorianne]

Huh? In the Ameria I live in you are allowed to organize a protest, including organize boycotts. What part of "free speech" don't you understand.

Free speech and free association are both a part of the 1st Ammendment to the Constitution. They are part of the "checks and balances" that our Founders envisioned making our system strong. As it turns out they were right and it is working beautifully.

Adherence to the principles embodied in the 1st Ammendment is a two-way street. Make it a one-way street and you trash the 1st Ammendment.

[johnb838]

You also have the right to stamp your little feet and hold your breath until you turn blue but it don't mean you're getting into Augusta!

[Mark Felton]

You miss my point. I will state it another way.

You have no right to free speech inside any private place or business.

The owners may dictate the limits of your speech. If you do not comply they have the right to eject you from their premises.

You also have no right to broadcast your speech if it requires the use of another persons facilities to do so. They may refuse you.

Otherwise, you may raise all the h3ll you wish.

[Coeur de Lion]

Absolutely, that's exactly how it should work. Also boycotts are useful in the sense of getting a good measure of the vox populi for a given issue. It provides a true measure of whether the issue has any substance. I wish it was used more often.

I would also prefer corporations, organizations and/or governments, etc. would stand up with respect to groups, when they're threaten by boycotts or law suits and the issue is basically lacking any substance; rather than just caving in. By caving in they just give the groups more incentive to pursue additional substanceless issues in the future.