the constitution promises me right to free speech - but movie theaters can throw me out for talking.
2nd amendment guarantees me right to bear arms - but my local gun store refuses to let anyone enter while armed. You can put the gun unloaded in its case and carry in. But as anti-Obama as they are, you are NOT wearing in your permit/glock.
4th amendment promises no illegal searches - but you wear a trenchcoat with bulges to the night club, and yes, they're searching you before letting you enter. "Open the coat, brah..."
Heck, try wearing a Hitler t-shirt to just about any store... see if they let you in lol... Free speech, my ass, on private property.
The fact is, we see standard consitutional rights revoked all the day time by PRIVATE businesses. It sucks, but we're free to use other business. I do'nt like the "no carry" policy of the gun store, (I bought a glock there a decade back before this policy) so I will go to other stores with less selection, because hey, they're not dicks. But I do respect their right to be anti-carry dicks. I just don't shop there.
Things like yelling "fire!" in a crowded theatre aren't protected by free speech because they risk endangering others in attendance if it causes a mass panic.
The examples you give all lead to the act of expressing your constitutional right causing a violation of the rights/privileges/potential-safety, etc of others (I don't necessarily agree with all of them...especially most 2nd and 4th amendment cases)
Ultimately, your individual rights aren't more important than the rights of other individuals. Private institutions should be free to decide when the expression of your rights infringe too much on the rights of others in the institution.
I realize that this leaves a huge freedom of interpretation by the institution, but there isn't really a logical "one-to-one & onto" set for each and every case of an individual's right vs its affect on the rights of others.
The important thing is that private institutions are allowed the autonomy of deciding these cases in their own; the government sets a minimal level of individual constitutional rights/privileges and an individual who feels their constitutional rights are wrongfully violated by a private institution can bring case against the institution with the government.
The PROBLEM comes when the government over-steps the bounds of (wha should be) a minimal set of constitutionally guaranteed rights and removes the rights of the private institution by micro-managing and over legislating.
Hippies love to think they're giving "power to the people" with big government regulations, but it's the opposite that happens--it removes the power of the private institution and it negates the power of the individual who feels the private institution is violating their personal rights.