When the Masters ended last month with a defeated Martha Burk hightailing it out of Augusta, we all thought that would be the last time we read the words "golf" and "First Amendment" in the same sentence.� Thanks to Annika Sorenstam's courage and Vijay Singh's ignorant comments, we again get an opportunity to educate the sports world about our Constitution.

Ironically, the two individuals at the forefront of this gender-equity golf controversy are both foreign born:� Annika's birthplace is Sweden and Vijay is a Fijan.� Regardless of their nationalities, the Colonial is being played in Fort Worth, Texas where, despite what some Texans believe, the U.S. Constitution applies.

Just as the same provision of the Constitution permits Augusta's male-only membership policy, it applies to Bank of America's decision to award a sponsor's exemption to Ms. Sorenstam.� The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants private clubs and organizations the right to choose with whom they wish to freely associate.� Just as special interest groups should not get to dictate the internal policies of private clubs, PGA tour members should not, through threats of withdrawal or intimidation, get to call the shots on sponsor exemptions.

Whether or not Annika makes the cut this week at the Colonial, we applaud her for wanting to test her mettle in a more competitive field.� Likewise, we applaud Bank of America for giving her the opportunity to do it and for giving us a reason to remind Americans about the importance of fervently defending our Constitutional rights, whether they are threatened in a courtroom or on a golf course.� Invoking the First Amendment right of freedom of association does not mean that all single-gender clubs must remain as such.� What it means is that it is up to the members and the organization to determine whether and when a change will be made or an exemption will be granted.