>>IMO, the members do not have the rights to form the terms and conditions. Again, the UT is a business and the rules of using the business are left up to the business owner, so long as those rules don't violate the laws where the business is incorporated.
>
>I wonder if it is not less cut-and-dry as this, Craig. We are huge on free speech, but also on allowing "businesses" to have pretty much a free reign in how they conduct themselves. For example - and this is extreme - if there is a neo-nazi group the creates a forum and says that African Americans are not allowed and bans people based on this. Does it fall under "rules of using the business" or would that be illegal? What determines the difference?

Hi Jay,
At the age I've reached (but still just a 'kid' compared to some who've told us their ages today < s >) I've seen "age discrimination" a-plenty BUT it is well disguised and I certainly wouldn't have a leg to stand on in a court.

Businesses **do** petty much have free reign, at least in the U.S. (and very similarly in Canada). For instance, they can deliberately not hire a person who smokes (even if only at home) or uses drugs or even is on medical drugs. Or wears a turban or ... On the other hand, the U.S. Government (and state/local governments) typically tries to constrain some of these things by weilding its "power of the purse" - they will forego doing business with companies that exhibit these kinds of restrictions.
I know that there are "equal opportunity" laws to help with these issues, but they first require complaint and then take a huge amount of time due to backlogs.

You may remember a few sports broadcasters who were summarily fired for their stated views on certain issues or their "recreational" happenstances. Private companies can do what they like, especially if they believe it can hurt their income.

Life is all shades of gray.

cheers