‘White Only’ Pool Sign Discriminatory, Not Decorative Commission Rules
Email
(Photo credit: Ohio Civil Rights Commission)
The Ohio Civil Rights Commission dismissed a landlord’s claim today that a “white only” pool sign was simply an historical antique sign and ruled that it was discriminatory.
“At this point, it means that we believe that it’s probable that discrimination has occurred,” commission spokeswoman Brandi Martin told ABCNews.com. The five-member commission decided unanimously on the matter, upholding an earlier ruling.
In December, Cincinnati landlord Jamie Hein was accused of discriminating against an African-American girl with a “white only” sign at her swimming pool. Hein told ABCNews.com that the sign was an antique and a decoration.
“I’m not a bad person,” said Jamie Hein. “I don’t have any problem with race at all. It’s a historical sign.”
The sign in question reads, “Public Swimming Pool, White Only.” It is dated 1931 and from Alabama.
Now, the Commission will attempt to facilitate resolution between Hein and Michael Gunn, 40, the man who took issue with Hein’s sign and filed a discrimination charge with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission. He was a tenant in one of Hein’s properties.
“At every step, we try to resolve the matter. We will attempt conciliation,” Martin said. “The goal is to resolve the matter, to find a means by which both parties would be satisfied in some sort of resolution or settlement.”
Neither Hein nor her attorney appeared in court today, which Martin said was “unexpected” since Hein had been the one to request that the original ruling be reconsidered.
Hein did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
If the attempt at a compromise is unsuccessful and Hein chooses to appeal the decision again, the matter will go before the state’s attorney general and both parties will be deposed.
When Hein, 31, spoke exclusively to ABCNews.com in December, she was unapologetic about the racist origins of the sign that she displayed at the entrance to her pool. She said she collects antiques and was given the sign as a gift. She also said that even though the sign seems to indicate that the pool is public, the pool is on her private property and “everybody has to ask before getting in my pool.”
Gunn said that his family previously “had unrestricted access to the pool area,” which Hein disputed. She said everyone, including her own father, has to ask permission before swimming in her pool.
“We invited my daughter, who is African-American, to visit and swim in the pool for the Memorial Day weekend,” Gunn wrote in his complaint. “The owner, Jamie Hein, accused my daughter of making the pool ‘cloudy’ because she used chemicals in her hair. Days later, she posted a sign on the gate to the pool which reads, ‘Public Swimming Pool, White Only.’”
Hein said that the sign had nothing to do with Gunn’s daughter and that it was already up at the time of that party, but cannot be seen when the gate is open.
In his complaint, he wrote that he moved out of Hein’s property in June “in order to not expose my daughter to the sign and the humiliation of the message.”
The Ohio Civil Rights Commission found on Sept. 29 that Hein did violate the Ohio Civil Rights Act by posting the sign, but Hein has asked that the decision be reconsidered. The sign has since been stolen.
“I’ve never said anything to that child,” Hein said. “If I have to stick up for my white rights, I have to stick up for my white rights. It goes both ways.”
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
“If I have to stick up for my white rights, I have to stick up for my white rights. It goes both ways.” Her WHITE rights?! And she says she’s not a racist!
Posted by: GetAGrip007 | January 12, 2012, 11:47 am 11:47 am
Do we need to reconsider the requirements for graduating from elementary school? It’s unbelievable that this kind of crap exists in 2012.
Posted by: AJ | January 12, 2012, 11:54 am 11:54 am
@Getagrip007. That’s the thing, all racist (racism comes in all color) are very illogical and always contradicting themselves–hence the reason why no one can take them seriously anymore these days. They are like children throwing a tantrum–a parent would just laugh.
Posted by: John | January 12, 2012, 11:58 am 11:58 am
Shee’ Sh’ sh! She is not a racist, you see she is only speaking for her white rights! It is like Newt fighting for Christian’s right in America. Only 44 of our presidents are Christians!
Posted by: yep | January 12, 2012, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
some of you sound surprise this is no different then the anti immigration laws being pass here in the USA.
Posted by: ruben | January 12, 2012, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
At the least Hein is very insensitive to others and at worst a barely closeted racist, e.g., “My white rights. . . .” Her whites only sign belongs in a museum not on display on her property.
Posted by: Charles Warwick | January 12, 2012, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm
I would award the tenant at least 6 months rent. Maybe then the next racist will think twice before they try something like this if it will hurt them in the wallet.
Posted by: Librarian53 | January 12, 2012, 12:31 pm 12:31 pm
Yes, the sign is historical. But also illegal. Put it in a museum. I can’t imagine how this A-A child felt.
It’s so thoroughly offensive to me and I’m white. I can’t believe anyone would think it would be okay to post this sign.
JOHN doesn’t get it either…
Posted by: Julie | January 12, 2012, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
I’m a little confused. Her pool? Is this a pool in the woman’s back yard or is it a community pool in the rental complex she owns? If you live in an apartment or a condo complex that has a community pool, do you have to ask the landlord for use or is it considered one of the amenities you pay for with your rent? I’d bet money if she is the landlord, she advertises the pool as an amenity.
Posted by: dan | January 12, 2012, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
If the sign said “Black Power” it would have been perfectly alright. No one, NO ONE would have dared complain !!!!!
Posted by: claude | January 12, 2012, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm
For all those posting here that this woman is a racist, you’re comments are neither proven nor can it be proven that Ms Hein is a racist, nor SHOULD it be proven that Hein is a racist. What’s proven is that Ms Hein’s sign CLEARLY DISCRIMINATION AGAINST NON-WHITES WHICH IS ILLEGAL UNDER THE LAW. It’s not illegal to BE a racist. It’s illegal to DISCRIMINATE on the basis of RACE in this particular situation. PLEASE PLEASE STOP HOLLERING ABOUT RACISM! THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CASE! This case is about unlawful DISCRIMINATION, and Ms Hein will have to account for this in court. I could not care less, and the law also could not care less whether or not Ms Hein is a racist. You have to draw your own conclusions about that, but they are not relevant in this case. Get it?
Posted by: DV1252x | January 12, 2012, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
What a disgusting excuse for a human being. (Hein) It astounds me that she would even try to justify this. What she did was wrong and by trying to defend it she is just digging herself into a deeper hole. She owes this family a public apology and I agree there should be a monetary award to the girl and her family from this landlord. AWFUL.
Posted by: Chelle | January 12, 2012, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm
This case is not about racism. It’s about unlawful discrimination. Those of you hollering about racism need to know that the law cannot and will not dictate the racial opinions or views of Ms Hein. This is not the issue. The issue is the sign which indicates that Ms Hein unlawfully discriminates against non-whites, and since it appears this is a sign posted on the gate of a pool which is for the use of the apartment tenants, it is for this reason, a “public” pool in the sense understood by the law. This is a building, apartment, apartment pool, or other real property items which are offered for lease by Ms Hein. The sign’s historical value is totally irrelevant to this matter. But Ms. Hein’s racial views, i.e., whether or not she is a racist, is even more irrelevant to this situation which may land in court. The court will treat this in my opinion as a clear cut case of unlawful discrimination, and that is what’s illegal here. NOT Ms Hein’s racial views. She has every right on God’s green earth to BE a racist; she just can’t discriminate on the basis of race in renting apartments or in offering the pool as part of the lease with her tenants.
Posted by: Fakir | January 12, 2012, 1:00 pm 1:00 pm
Dud, what was you thinking?
No win situation.
Posted by: Don | January 12, 2012, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm
“If the sign said “Black Power” it would have been perfectly alright. No one, NO ONE would have dared complain !!!!!” ~~~~~~~ Think it through, and you might learn something. Does a sign that says “Black Power” prohibit a certain race of people from using an amenity or service available to other groups of people? No. If the sign said “Blacks Only” it would be just as racist as a sign that says ‘Whites Only.’ On the other hand, there probably would have been no issue brought before the authorities if the sign had said “White Power” and black relatives of tenants were provided the same access to the pool just as white relatives were given.
Posted by: Minorkey1 | January 12, 2012, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm
Wow, it’s unbelievable that a 31 year old woman wouldn’t know that this sign would be considered racist! Where has she been, living under a rock? If it was a gift, she should have kept it in her own home instead of a pool that her renters use. And I agree with Dan, bet she calls that pool an amentity to rent her properties.
Posted by: Bonnie | January 12, 2012, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm
“White rights”? Haven’t all these racist dinosaurs died off yet? Oh what a glorious day that will be!!
Posted by: kron | January 12, 2012, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
Hein is in her own right to post any sign she wishes on her property, if she is racist then she is no fact around it, whats more disturbing is the african american community is more racist than anyone else in this nation for the simple fact of what happened to their ancestors back in the day, hell for one i am part racist myself but who else can say that
Posted by: GP | January 12, 2012, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
“‘If I have to stick up for my white rights, I have to stick up for my white rights. It goes both ways.’ Her WHITE rights?! And she says she’s not a racist!”
Yeah, right, because it’s obvious it only really goes one way. Blacks and any other “minority” get preference over the rights of caucasians in some effort to rectify the errors of 50+ years ago, when they weren’t even around.
The sign is certainly tacky, but this is more of a pissing match than anything serious. “Chelle”…get a life…this stuff is ridiculous, like you.
Posted by: Jack | January 12, 2012, 1:09 pm 1:09 pm
If the sign had said White Power, or if it had said Black Power, if the case went to court, the court would have to determine whether or not such a sign indicates some kind of unlawful discrimination against a person or persons of a particular race. In my view, such a sign is NOT an indication of racial discrimination, though it may very well be a sign that the owner is a white or black racist. The real point about this sign is NOT the racism of the owner of the pool and the apartments! The real point is that this sign, whatever its “historical” value or meaning, clearly indicates that the owner discriminates against non-whites. Ms Hein would be very well advised to REMOVE it immediately, rather than continue in the farce by calling it a sign with “historical significance.” In any case, Ms Hein has EVERY right to BE a racist or to hold racist views of non-whites, but what she does NOT have the right to do is to discriminate in the lease of real estate (including the use of the pool) against non-whites! OK? So everyone calm down and let the courts explain this to her. Meanwhile, Ms Hein can go right on living in her fantasy world of living in the Confederacy until the cows come home to drink from the pool. OK???
Posted by: DV1252x | January 12, 2012, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
@Dan – ‘black power’ came about after and as a result of when AA’s were subjected to discrimination. Until such time as the reference ‘black power’ is truly associated with something associated with the slavery and discrimination of any particular race – you should just STFU.
Posted by: Common Sense | January 12, 2012, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
.Stupid is what she is…This is 2012 and you can’t “publically/openly” discriminate; it’s against the law…This Biznitch new exactly what she was doing… Her “white rights”, but she’s not a racist..What a joke!!
Posted by: shewolff | January 12, 2012, 1:21 pm 1:21 pm
CLAUDE, you lost your argument.
Posted by: panchang810 | January 12, 2012, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm
Ok, one more time, listen up all you people: TO BE A RACIST IS NOT ILLEGAL OR UNLAWFUL Again, TO BE A RACIST IS NOT ILLEGAL OR UNLAWFUL! NEVER HAS BEEN NEVER WILL BE. What’s illegal or unlawful is to DISCRIMINATE against non-whites in renting or leasing apartments, and this includes discriminating against people on the basis of their race in the use of the pool. This is unlawful DISCRIMINATION under the law. If a landlord is a racist that’s his or her business, and the law does give a sparrow’s fart in a windstorm whether Ms Hein is a racist! The law only says that she or any other landlord CANNOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF RACE!. Ms Hein’s sign seems to clearly indicate that she discriminates on the basis of race. For that reason, Ms Hein will probably be taken to court either by a tenant, a potential tenant, or the guest of a tenant who wished to use the pool or the pool area. Yes I said the guest too. I know the law on this subject, so shut up and listen to me. Ms Hein probably IS a racist, but in any case, she’s more of a FOOL than anything else because now she’s drawn the ire of the media and the civil rights community. She should take the damn sign down and put it in a museum if she thinks it has so much historical value.
Posted by: DB1954x | January 12, 2012, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm
What’s with the argument of is this about racism or discrimination? She’s a bigot, the sign clearly demonstrates this, and it takes a really pathetic person to be this hateful towards a child. Shame on her and shame on anybody trying to take up for this.
Posted by: lexingtonlady | January 12, 2012, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Common Sense: Ms Hein’s racism is not the issue. She may think it’s the issue, but she’s wrong. The issue is whether or not she discriminates against non-whies in the use of the pool by her tenants and/or their guests. If a court of law concludes that the sign indicates that she does, she will lose her case in court. But this will be a civil case, not a criminal case. That’s why we should call the sign AN INDICATION OF THE LANDLORD’S UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION. There’s no law that says it’s a crime to BE a racist. I’m sorry, but there just isn’t, and the fact that Ms Hein apparently thinks that’s what she’s accused of may indicate that she’s just stump stupid! In any case, she looks and sounds like a racist to me, but that’s irrelevant to her legal situation. If Ms Hein were a black woman and she had this sign that says “whites only” posted on the gate to the pool, she would STILL appear to be discriminating on the basis of race! In other words, she would still appear to be discriminating against non-whites even if she were non-white herself. Personally, if I were black, I’d assume she’s a racist, and I would simply not rent from her or go anywhere near her pool. But I would still have the right to do that unnder the law.
Posted by: DB1954x | January 12, 2012, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm
i’m surprised that the racial and obscene texts she sent the father on the day she put up the sign and every day since, havent’ been released to the public.
those will prove exactly what kind of a person Jaimie Hein is.
Posted by: Marie | January 12, 2012, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
DB1954X, you are absolutely right, this case is about illegal discrimination, not being a racist. We can think any thoughts we like, but when we take action to limit someone else’s rights because of those racist thoughts, that is the illegal part.
I hope the court awards the father and his daughter some of her cash as payback for her discrimination.
Posted by: Librarian53 | January 12, 2012, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
so if a white person wants to protect their rights, they are automatically racist? If a black does the same thing, then it’s a heroic stand against racism? Can’t have it both ways folks! Sometimes you need a painful reminder from the past to keep it from happening again. By the lib’s way of thinking, the Civil war history would be completely rewritten. Sometimes, things are just how they seem, get over it!
Posted by: Dave | January 12, 2012, 2:23 pm 2:23 pm
clearly, she is a racist. whoever is fighting against the OBVIOUS that she is not a racist, you must be an idiot, probably one of those ready to sue anyone and everyone who left a hair in your sandwich. i feel sorry for the racist lady.. around town, travel, anyone who recognizes her will make sure she remembers her “white rights.” ok, ok, ok. maybe she isn’t, maybe she is. the FACT is that she is IGNORANT.
Posted by: just me | January 12, 2012, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
Common Sense ??? I don’t recall posting anything about “black power”
Posted by: dan | January 12, 2012, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm
I’d be willing to bet she’s a republican, and probably a member of the Tea Party…
Posted by: Brad | January 12, 2012, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
Isn’t this on her own property?
Posted by: Seriously | January 12, 2012, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
Her property, her pool…….her rght to put up whatever sign she likes. If you don’t like it, don’t swim in her pool. The judge did not follow law.
Posted by: itisitist't | January 12, 2012, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm
Re Dave’s, “By the lib’s way of thinking, the Civil war history would be completely rewritten.”
Nope, we like it just the way it is. You lost.
Posted by: Cassandra | January 12, 2012, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
Dan, You really need to get a new expression, and an education, and not one from idiot left wing professors who think you have a “right” to free everything. You probably wouldn’t even know what to do with a bar of soap, much less with advice you’d get from a doctor under Obamacare.
Posted by: DB1954x | January 12, 2012, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm
Re: ” I once dated a black woman, and I have dozens of black colleagues in my profession. I’ve never EVER advocated violence against ANYONE for any reason, and I’ve been a long-time supporter of Civil Rights for everyone. I used to belong to a Civil Rights organization, and I’ve worked as a lawyer on civil rights cases. I’m also a PROUD conservative, supporter of the Tea Party, and a registered Republican.” 1. You ever wonder why she only went out with you once? 2. It’s not a communist revolution that’s the problem – that’s “Red Dawn” idiocy. It’s the rise of Fascism in the guise of right wing patriotism that’s the real and present danger.
Posted by: Cassandra | January 12, 2012, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
The idiots saying it’s “her pool”. yes, it is her pool, but it is an amenity of the apartment complex. therefore, she has to let everyone use it or no one. she can’t keep black tenants out, as it is an extension of the apartment….
Posted by: romeycash | January 12, 2012, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
I apologize to Dan. I was mistaken. He did NOT say that this landlord, Ms Hein, is a Tea Party member. Otherwise I apologize to him for nothing since he still appears to be a liberal bonehead.
To others: it matters not a sparrow’s fart in a windstorm that the sign was on HER PROPERTY. It’s discrimination, and it’s actionable in a court of law. UNLIKE, I might add, racism. Making “racism” a crime would be creating a thought crime and that’s unconstitutional, even though liberals would dearly love for racism to be a crime, and they have nearly made it one in the so-called “hate-crimes” legislation which survives in the various state laws like a stinking turd on top of the U.S. Constitution.
Posted by: DB1954x | January 12, 2012, 3:58 pm 3:58 pm
Cassandra, I never saw the black woman again or dated her because she shipped out to Germany shortly after our first and only date.
And your basis for accusing me of being a “right-winger” is a fantasy movie which I never watched from probably 30 years ago. Brilliant, just brilliant. lmao :-D
Posted by: DB1954x | January 12, 2012, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm
She had to fight for her white right to (pool) party.
Posted by: nocturneOne | January 12, 2012, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
GOOOOO Jamie Hein!!!!!! I would of loved to post that sign infront of my yard!!!!!
Posted by: CherryPie | January 12, 2012, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm
Do you people not understand that the pool expenses (maintenance and water) is calculated into the tenants monthly rent? No landlord I ever heard of has offered free pool access without charging them for what it costs to maintain it. Mr. Gunn was paying the same amount that the other tenants were paying. So why does this bigot feel that she can charge him the same amount for monthly rent as other tenants and then deny him access to the pool? Was the stupid woman willing to lower Mr. Gunns rent to compensate for not being able to use the pool? Of course not. Just another point of view.
Posted by: howdymo1 | January 12, 2012, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm
I hate to point out that in response to Ruben’s earlier post.. “some of you sound surprise this is no different then the anti immigration laws being pass here in the USA”.. apples and oranges my friend. This issue is between two AMERICAN citizens.. anti-immigration laws have to do with those who are in this country illegally. Just like I would be illegal if I crossed into Mexico without papers, or France, or China. Get over yourself.. anti-immigration applies to all ethnicities who try to remain in a country undocumented. Unfortunately with the close proximity, it just happens to be those of Mexican descent.
Posted by: Kim | January 12, 2012, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm
@ Jack – sounds like you have one pretty big chip on your shoulder. If you think that the playing field is even for everyone, you are seriously deluded. Me, I do have a life and in it I have no time for bigotry or ignorance.
Posted by: Chelle | January 12, 2012, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm
If it had said “blacks only” it would have been ok. Double standards. Whining and cry about not getting enough handouts is not enough. They don’t want equal rights, they want free money, housing, food, entertainment. Why do you think they put obama in Washington, now they are disappoint. Why is there no White History Month? Because it would be discrimination. Poor souls.
Get over it an move on. Try to act human.
Posted by: TG Weezle | January 12, 2012, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm
There is no place for this in the United States…the owner is obviously a racist…he needs to accept the fact that he’s lost the battle…remember, all men are created equal…and if you don’t like that idea then that’s YOUR problem…and oh, i’m white by the way…
Posted by: RalphF | January 12, 2012, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm
“If it had said “blacks only” it would have been ok. Double standards.” ~~~~~~~ Why don’t you try it and find out for yourself, TG Weezle. I think you’d find that you’d be brought before the law just as quickly as Ms. Hein was. But don’t take my word for it. Try it. I dare you.
Posted by: Minorkey1 | January 12, 2012, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
ARE YOU SERIOUS TG WEEZLE!!!? FIRST OF ALL: If it said blacks only, it would still be wrong. It is not a double standard. As far as a handout… I GUARNTEE I HAVE A BETTER EDUCATION THAN YOU, MORE DEGREES THAN YOU, AND ALSO BETTER HOUSING (WHICH YOU THINK I WANT FREE) THAN YOU! People like you kill me!!! You have more excuses to why you think someone wants something rather than enhancing your own self!!! Why did we put President Obama in the white house?
-Kathleen
Birmingham, AL
Posted by: Kathleen | January 12, 2012, 8:53 pm 8:53 pm
This woman is not only flagrantly racist, but she’s not even intelligent enough to disguise it well. She says, “I don’t have any problem with race at all” and then turns around and says, “If I have to stick up for my white rights, I have to stick up for my white rights.” Well, which is it, idiot? And as far as her defense of the sign, anybody with even average intelligence knows that an antique belongs indoors, in a frame or display case; not out exposed to the elements of heat, cold, wind, rain, hail, snow, etc. to do all manner of damage. This woman is as stupid as any racist person is. What else would you expect?
Posted by: Tara | January 13, 2012, 12:26 am 12:26 am
ARE YOU SERIOUS TG WEEZLE!!!? FIRST OF ALL: If it said blacks only, it would still be wrong. It is not a double standard. As far as a handout… I GUARNTEE (Guarantee) I HAVE A BETTER EDUCATION (doubt it )THAN YOU, MORE DEGREES THAN YOU (online), AND ALSO BETTER HOUSING (WHICH YOU THINK I WANT FREE) (most likely) THAN YOU! People like you kill me!!! (they must have killed you spelling teacher) You have more excuses to why you think someone wants something rather than enhancing your own self!!! Why did we put President Obama in the white house? (come on some “whites” helped… unfortunately )
-Kathleen
Birmingham, AL ( i would have taken you more seriously, if you lived else where)
Posted by: North Georgia | January 13, 2012, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
i liked the sign. it was nice.
Posted by: patrick | January 13, 2012, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm
It says “white only.” It doesn’t say “white people only. If you weren’t all thinking like racists in the first place maybe you’d have thought “white trunks only” , like I did. Labor day usually marks the end of the swimming season.
I am surrounded by a nation of crybabies.
Posted by: White what? | January 13, 2012, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
Taste the BanHammer!
Posted by: Just Saying | January 13, 2012, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm
It is sad that we still have to deal with the color of our skin. No sure if this truly will disappear any time soon. I believe that this started with fear of the unknown. Collisions do happen from time to time. When the Native Americans met the Spanish conquistadors, it did’t go well for the Natives. When Whites met blacks for the first time, it didn’t go well for the blacks either. The world is different now and we must accept it. After all, every one is just one color in the inside of our bodies, “RED”. Fear of the unknown is poison and it brings many misunderstandings. I only hope that when we meet our brothers the extra terrestrials it will go well for us. And not the history that has taken place in our planet. God bless!!!
Posted by: Mr. Rapalo | January 13, 2012, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
If it was not racially motivated, her statement would have been that she had to defend her “human rights”, since that does not imply that “white rights” are different than the rights of all other humans. That is why “civil rights” are the rights of citizens, human rights are the rights of humans, and “black/white/Hispanic/Asian/aboriginal rights” are all discriminatory terms.
Posted by: Tim | January 26, 2012, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm
I am very glad the commission ruled that the sign is discriminatory and not ‘free speech’. It is hardly decorative. This women needs to understand that she does not have the right to hide behind the first amendment, or use it as an excuse. Free speech does not mean freedom to hurt by lies.
Posted by: G Sysdude | January 27, 2012, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm