>The issue is less the corporations asserting a right to speak in some
>forum -- although the advertising cases have massively cut the ability of
>government to regulate corporate advertising -- but on the corporate right
>NOT to speak or be forced to associate with speech they don't want to be
>associated with. It allows companies to avoid public responsibilities where
>they might be forced to "speak" to the public in ways they don't agree
>with.
And would John Q. Moneybags III, individual capitalist, behave any differently?
Doug