Talk:Freedom of association

message: Jagz, please do not destroy the work noting the particular case of the US's civil rights laws as founded upon the insitution of slavery.  It is clear that the influential position of the US during the 1960s and beyod had a profound impact on the geopolitics of immigration and integration.  Jim Bowery 23:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  US As Special and Important Case 

message: "However, the implicit First Amendment right of association in the U.S. Constitution has been limited by court rulings. For example, it is illegal in the United States to consider race in the making and enforcement of private contracts other than marriage or taking affirmative action. This limit on freedom of association results from Section 1981 of Title 42 of the United States Code, as balanced against the First Amendment in the 1976 decision of Runyon v. McCrary.[3]"
I am sorry I might have misread this but is this paragraph saying that discrimination is allowed in marriage, or is saying I can discriminate in my choice of spouse? (Because I totally just shop for spouses like cereal.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForeverZero (talk • contribs) 05:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limitation 

message: The middle paragraph, the last two sentences are about Right and Left Libertarians, respectively.  However, both sentences effectively say the same thing, with different wording.  If there's not a difference between the viewpoint of Right and Left Libertarians on this, it would be less confusing if the two sentences were just merged.
Pdxleif (talk) 03:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libertarians 

message: The Freedom of association does also include the freedom not to associate with individuals or groups for any reason. It's kind of a freedom of not including or excluding. That should be worked into the article somehow. 41.150.100.20 (talk) 18:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freedom of not associating 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Freedom of association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161127152449/http://www.quirinale.it/qrnw/costituzione/pdf/costituzione_inglese.pdf to http://www.quirinale.it/qrnw/costituzione/pdf/costituzione_inglese.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:20, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Freedom of association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130513015149/http://socialchangenyu.com/2013/02/01/citizens-united-and-the-paradox-of-corporate-speech/ to http://socialchangenyu.com/2013/02/01/citizens-united-and-the-paradox-of-corporate-speech/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Much of this article appears to have been compiled in a slanted way. I removed two assertions in particular that alleged curtailment of this right in the US, when in reality, the examples given conflated freedom of association with the ability to insert a religious test into functions of a public institution, and the ability to discriminate by race or ethnicity. 2601:400:C200:43F1:4DC2:DDC8:2F64:55C7 (talk) 00:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs review