January 23, 2010 07:00 AM
Can corporations bear arms?
Since the Roberts Court has now ruled that corporations have the same rights as people and overturned decades of laws regulating their speech, I'm wondering: Do they now have the right to arm themselves by employing Blackwater-type mercenaries and post them all over their office buildings?
Will Wal-Mart post armed guards in their parking lots?
Seems like a natural consequence. If corporations can enjoy full First Amendment protections, wouldn't they likewise get Second Amendment rights?
Repeal capitalism.
At least the capitalism of the über capitalists.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Corporations already hire armed guards to protect their propery. Have you been to Walmart lately? The one near my house always has an armed, off-duty cop near the door.
The town I live in is so tough, they have armed guards at Chuckie Cheese's.
those guards may be needed to squelch drunk soccer-mom catfights...
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
I just went to a Buster's and Dave's in San Jose. Never seen one before. like a chuck e cheese for adults, but the kids are in there too. Lot's of gang control and cops outside.
Just to bring it back on topic I'm sure Buster's and Dave's is incorporated. Post hoc, Ergo propter hoc, corporations are evil.
of old boardwalks, but:
No beach setting required.
No smoking permitted.
Odds of winning better with old carney games.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
Be interesting when the guys in suits going around with collection plates are packing glocks...
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
Especially since the fatal shooting at the Megachurch in Colorado Springs, many churches hire private security or off-duty officers to stand watch during services.
if they "think" you are a threat.
This should be very interesting.
Georgia and Florida have essentially the same law. In Tennessee, a man is allowed to shoot to kill to protect a lady's honor or reputation, but the law has only been invoked a couple of times in a century.
they now enjoy the full protections of the Bill of Rights.
well what would that matter since Bush and Obama have basically pissed on it
More to the point, can they marry each other?
That's been going on for a long time. Their called mergers.
Since most corporations in this country are from Delaware, state laws there prohibit gay marriage. Only gay corporations from Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut can legally marry.
Most corporations suck. Also exempt from fornication statutes, so they can continue screwing the public, often with real hardware.
The law regards employees as barely human, somewhere between mineral and animal, but gives corporations full personhood, with rights far superior to either female or fetus.
Since they now (and have) enjoy these "rights" and are treated as a person, will they now go to jail if they break the law ???? Should they be taxed as "individuals?"
that sticky little thing called.....Limited Liabiity..protects Execs and share holders...
that needs to be scrapped....
Sounds good to Me!
hiring private security guards for years.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
The next thing you know, Murdoch will recreate an armed city-state resembling those that existed in northern Italy during the late Middle Ages.
Plain and simple.
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
Does this mean that Exxon gets to vote? "And voting for Wal-Mart"...does this mean they can be drafted? does this mean we'll be indentured servants in a little while, like, I was born in the state of Disney so I work up through the ranks and such by order of birth...like the military has neighborhoods where everyone is a part of it...will this become of us?
What I want to know is how much these 5 were paid. I mean, by extension, they voted themselves out of a job as well, once the corporations decide to replace them to benefit their means.
How do we keep this from becoming law?
ugh
Some are armed. That's not new exactly. There are private security contractors that provide this service.
attempt to nullify a contract they entered into with a corporation that is less than 18 years old. It is no longer settled law.
BTW - I used 'that' instead of 'which' because a corporation is not a lifeless object anymore, like Frankenstein's monster. And we know how that turned out for Republi...ah, I mean Frankenstein.
used "who."
forced retirement at 75 years old?
...and have the corporation ruled incompetent when it begins shitting pollutants all over its territory, and when it forgets the difference between right and wrong?
Or incorporate and join forces?
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60D3Z72...
Heh, they'll have rights. And more money to enforce them than I do.
we're occupied by trans-national corporations... they hold our government in check... corporations HAVE been arming themselves for years in dangerous overseas locales... (think Shell / Nigeria or any company that does business in the former eastern bloc countries (esp the Balkans) where organized crime has its fingers in everything - and kills those who don't play along)... but John is right in his speculation - yes, i (and others i speak with) believe that now corporations will raise private armies in order to 'defend' their rights under the law...
Now they can just cut out the middle man, as long as a corporation was "born" in America, they can run for president
in 2012, vote WalMart for president! (Vice President NewsCorp will make the usual gaffs, but nobody will care, because caring will be a federal offence by then...)
"I could give a flying crap about the political process.... We're an entertainment company."
- Glenn Beck - Forbes interview; April 26, 2010
foreign countries can influence our elections through corporations. This case is the worst in our history since the Dred Scott decision (people are property--now property are people).
that's the best thing about this decision....Oui?
The world just might save us from our self.
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia ... is the largest shareholder of News Corp outside the Murdoch family. [He] holds large stakes in many American companies, including Citi.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/22/saudi-mur...
YES!! Everone should know. No wonder they attack global warming.
The first ammendment does not contain the word "people" when calling for freedom of speech.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The second ammendment does:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
This ruling just removes a ban on funding speech (corporate) before an election. It also levels the field for all corporations because communications corporations were exempt from this statute. GE, Viacom and Rupert all had the power to flood the airwaves before an election, but the ACLU was banned. Does anyone really think that large corporations had any problem getting their message out before an election? No. Small corporation were the ones most directly affected.
Banning speech is not the answer. Campaign reform is. Public financing of elections will be the only way to fix this issue.
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/25985
Above is a link to a twitter by Fred Thompson suggesting the Dems shouldn't be worried that corps have been granted free speech, but should be thankful they didn't give them the right to bear arms (suggesting Democrats be shot)
That's close enough to a call to violence for me. Arrest this guy!
Damn, I guess I'm really missing the Tweet Train...
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
The Supreme Court might get it when a corporation is appointed as a Justice.
its already been stacked with former corporate attorneys much the way with the federal courts have been with judges and prosecutors
good point
what's next? forced to buy/take their products because not choosing to infringes on their individual right?
You won't be able to sue over bad products because that might hurt their individual liberties.
Actually I was asking something similar the day before yesterday.
Can a corporation bear arms in the military, and if so who?
Every citizen has responsibilities to the State, but what responsibilities do the corporations have.
I was pointing that out to show the absurdity of considering an abstraction as an individual, and it's like they're being given all the rights of citzens but none of the responsibilities.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
The Corporation points out.
http://www.thecorporation.com/
..is that The Corporation asks the rhetorical question "if corporations are people, what kind of people are they?"
..and comes up with the decidedly non-rhetorical answer that they would be regarded as psychopaths by the psychiatric community if they were real flesh and blood people. "A danger to him(her)self or others" gets you locked up for life in a rubber room.
Can we do that to Wal-Mart and Newscorp? Please, pretty please?
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
If corporations were people the failure of Wall Street last year would've resulted in massive incarcerations, so the prisons look like there's been a population boom.
But come to think of it, a lot of prisons are being privatized.
It looks like ollie north's shadow government has come to fruition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhquKI_wq_0
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Remember, during the crisis two years ago, the Federal government stated they would NOT prosecute corporations for wrongdoing because of what happened to Arther Anderson during the Enron debacle, the charges destroyed the company.
And who was in charge of the government then,
Was it...
booshco?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
No. two years ago it was Obama. FOX has the timeline.
What difference does it make anyway ys? Bush bad. Obama continue bad but look different, different party, so must be good.
Do you own a calendar?
(Or did I miss your sarcasm?)
You missed my sarcasm.
Does Obama have the Nazi grandfather, who also tried to overthrow the Federal Government?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Barack's grandfather is Stalin. That is where he got his communist/socialist tendencies. The fascist tendencies must have come from the mother's side (she's Italian).
Stalin came from Kenya?
And of course Mussolini was an Italian and a fascist, so that means all Italians are fascists?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Winter home?
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
Yes. It's sweeping generalization saturday here at curtilingus' house.
My Mom lived in Italy and I traveled there a fair amount., so we must be fascists as well.
And I wasn't suggesting they share a particular ideology, because that would imply the family has ideals rather than just a streak of privilege and selfishness.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/songs/kenya/
Do Corporations now have the right to remain silent?
Do Corporations now have the right to non incrimination?
Do Corporations now have the right to sing the blues?
Do Corporations now know who wrote the book of love?
Do Corporations now know who put the bop in the bop shebop bop,and
who put the ram in the rama lama ding dong?
If Corporations are now people,(and we all know people are funny), are Corporations suddenly Funny
Can Corporations buy off the child's menu if they are a little corporation.
Are Corporations prohibited from marrying if they are in the same business?
I can think of one benefit the SCOTUS may have overlooked--Now I can YELL at the CORPORATIONS to: "GET OFF MY LAWN"
And if Money is speech, talk is cheap, money talks, nobody walks, turn on a dime, buck the system, pay your way, put it on my bill, duck responsibility,I don't recall, and I am afraid that is above my pay grade anyway.
And if money is speech, and the speech is symbolic, does that mean the conservatives have finally accepted Tinker v Des Moines?
Both dan quaile and elizabeth dole denounced that elections had become more about money when they withdrew before the first debate for president (so much for the historicity of her run [and Shirley Chisholm and Pat Schroeder]), so did this mean quaile and dole were liberals?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Then the government will have the power to compel corporate citizens like Blackwater (Xe), Halliburton and KBR to perform hazardous duties in war zones - with compensation decided solely by the government, on its terms, with no possibility of negotiations.
The same companies that ferried "sailboat fuel" across the desert at exorbitant rates - and abandoned semi rigs when they ran out of gas, and charged the government more than they were worth - can now be forced to provide their services for less than minimum wage, even at a loss. This could end up being a good thing. No-bid cost-minus contracts, I love it!
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
Let's take advantage of this and that eminent domain decision. (Ever notice how these "objective legal interpretations of the Constitution" always break down along party lines?) Hey Walmart, you know that new superstore you erected at the edge of town, tax-free? We think it would make a terrific community center, thank you very much.
He really is quite charming when he gets "angry" like that.
Since corporations are individuals now can't we all start claiming everything on our tax return. Corporations can claim anything from a paperclip to huge machinery as a business expense to stay running/alive. But they are an individual now. So shouldn't we be able to deduct food, our vehicle, gas, clothes for everyday, furniture, heat, electric? We're all individuals now and we should get the same benefits.
is intended to be a factual statement
food, clothing, housing, gasoline, healthcare.
...all get written off as business expenses on the 1040's!
what is leftover is "income".
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Halliburton, G.E. ....
Corporations have always had the Right to Bear Arms - including nuclear arms.
Gun control is only for the little people.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
In the "good old White, Christian days of the glorious 19th century" the bloody Pinkertons were hired guns for the corporations. A Wikipedia factoid:
"At its height, the Pinkerton National Detective Agency employed more agents than there were members of the standing army of the United States of America, causing the state of Ohio to outlaw the agency due to fears it could be hired out as a private army or militia."
Thank goodness we're stamping out all that commie, gay, liberal progressiveness and getting back to the Good Old Days, eh?
can do whatever the hell they damned well please.
Actually the decision from the other day doesn't give corporations the right bear arms, since first they'd have to have arms.
It gives them the right to be commanders of those who own arms.
And then when CEO's are replaced with computers, and workers and soldiers with robots, what then have we?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N5N4zBcwbI
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
those who bear arms are replaced by robots?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Big Dog for president!
Robots tend to be much more reasonable than real people.
The next president and his running mate?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTuTjbFt5CI
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Sesame Street broke the unspoken law of parents "Keep robots away from the children!"
Maybe there's a chance for this candidacy yet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTx9WMsxLLM
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Can a corporation wear a tube top?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I would love to see someone put the five cons of SCOTUS on the spot by suing to demand that, under equal protection, every person in the US now has limited liability and rights to claim proprietary information.
If you break the law they can't send you to jail, because they can't send a corporation to jail obviously.
Pickpockets and petty thieves' lawyers are going to have a field day with this stupid decision.
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
All nine Justices held that corporations have the right of free speech.
Glenn Greenwald here
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
..in both Greenwald and Jonathan Turley for the way they have interpreted this decision - purely on the issue of First Amendment rights. Sadly, the training of a lawyer seems to entail the ability to take everything in the narrowest possible context. Why did neither of these supposedly liberal attorneys (although Turley is more properly a libertardian) even address the issue of whether a corporation should be considered a person under law to begin with.
I'm with Randi Rhodes on this. "When a corporation can have a colonoscopy, I'll accept that it's a person."
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
Corporations have every right to speak on their own behalf, commercially. The problem is when they speak politically. The REAL problem is when they spend money politically and we call it speech. If those individuals whose personal interests coincide with some corporate interest wish to speak politically, they have always had that right, as citizens. We the People established this government, for US.
..is when the same entity is allowed to both donate to a candidate's campaign and then lobby the same person when he/she is elected.
Lobbying implies that you disagree with an elected official's position, and want him to change his/her mind for your benefit.
Campaign donations imply that you agree with a candidate's positions, and want him/her in power.
See the contradiction? And do you see how lobbying an incumbent, then contributing to their campaign leads to the INESCAPABLE inference that influence peddling has occurred.
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
Good point, that might provide an opening for new legislation that a corporation can't do both to the same candidate/politician.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
that there'd be no need for lobbyists any more . . . hmmm, so many out of work lobbyists - what WILL they do??
The top story in the dallas morning nudes website for the Nation is:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TV_...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
In the jewelry district of LA, the buildings with diamond bourses inside all have heavily armed guards. These are not $10 an hour rent-a-guards but more like ex-Israeli military. I'm told there were bullet holes in an elevator once when someone tried stealing.
So, corporations already can hire people to bear arms for them.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
I knew that wording was gonna be misconstrued and gamed by the disingenuous amongst us. :-/
I'm not that upset by the way. Like they say... "this is a forward looking statement" and only contains a projected theory. ;) Evet touched on it the other day; lawyers. This can't be a nation of laws if one believes there are laws that supersede man/women, human made laws.
And to think about the fact, that by law, Corp. main purpose is to generate profits for their shareholders. Hey... sometimes ya have to make mistakes to get things right. Who is in charge of the/these "Bar" associations anyhow... You just wait until some of the big players start hurting... talk about, tattletales...
Study the symptoms not the virus...
corporations neither have first nor second amendment rights.
but their shareholders have. and if their shareholders can collectively decide how to use the earnings of their company. for example - campaign contributions.
how does that apply to the second amendment?
"Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of Citibank's largest shareholder, and the China Development Bank are expected to invest several billion dollars in Citibank," :-/
Study the symptoms not the virus...
you also make a good point. does the court decision say anything about limiting campaign contributions of mostly foreign corporations?
I don't know. but that the current limitations were repealed doesn't mean any kind of limitations are illegal.
is jumping in bed with News Corp:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200912040008
They already game the political process. What's next, oil prices?
Their shareholders already have the right to petition THEIR government and to support candidates of their choosing. Not only is the collective political "speech" double-dipping, the corporate voice soon will drown out ALL private citizens. What began as one person one vote has been corrupted to one dollar one vote.
Tidbit from the teevee:
Obama's record-shattering 2008 campaign war chest: ~$800,000,000
Estimated revenues of American corporations: ~$21,000,000,000,000
Soon presidential candidates on their way to meet lobbyists won't deign to pick up $800 million on the sidewalk.
CorpoRATions routinely demand that employees renounce their Second Amendment rights on corporate property, even if that property is in a crime-ridden neighborhood and even if other employees have been subjected to violent crime. Ask any convenience store clerk. If they arrive armed, they lose their jobs. Some refuse to allow guns in employee cars, and a local carpet mill fired a worker who came straight from an unsuccessful deer hunt to work, without stopping at home to unload the truck. Unemployment denied, courts uphold the rats against the workers.
Not only can corporations bear arms but they will now be able to change the law so you cannot. Every law the corporations do not like will now be changed to suit their needs. Out the window go all the labor laws, pensions for working people, healthcare, and in the end even voting rights will be lost. It’s the natural progression of corporate fascism. Bend over America. This is going to hurt.
Corporate mergers and take-overs are going to get a lot more interesting.
What, doing training for companies that may actually have goods and customers with real money??
Yeah, a few Walmart peons getting hit with 'friendly-fire' in such training exercises can likely be paid off cheaply. Walmart will appoint inhouse H&R Block tax attorneys to represent wounded victims if they lack their own counsel.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
What, doing training for companies that may actually have goods and customers with real money??
Yeah, a few Walmart peons getting hit with 'friendly-fire' in such training exercises can likely be paid off cheaply. Walmart will appoint inhouse H&R Block tax attorneys to represent wounded victims if they lack their own counsel.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
susceptibility to radio control manipulation/ disabling. They haven't gotten it down yet. But the nationwide electronics store pulled most of the stuff you can build such a device with. Too bad every electronic device made now has the same parts.
Security by the stupid.
this was supposed to go upthread with ysb and mt.
The case finding that Corporations are people needs to be corrected. Nothing in the case declared such -- the court reporter screwed up, intentionally or unintentionally. Come on Supreme Court get your stuff together!! Making current law (corporations having free speech/money rights) based on a false finding? Did you all get your law degrees
from Sears Law School and Watch Repair? Or do you simply prostitute the law with your Yale, Harvard, and Stanford law degrees?
It has been suggested that politicians wear NASCAR-style jackets covered with patches representing their various corporate sponsors. I think it might be just as appropriate to dress them in high heels and fishnet stockings. Same for SCOTUS justices.
I'm telling you, this is not going to look fashionable on whores like Mitch McConnell and Joe Lieberman. And I certainly don't want to evoke the image of Anton Scalia in anything low cut. *shudder*
"In theory theory and practice are alike. In practice they are very different."
Current membership
12/19/75 John Paul Stevens Religion Protestant
09/26/86 Antonin Scalia Religion Roman Catholic
02/18/88 Anthony Kennedy Religion Roman Catholic
10/23/91 Clarence Thomas Religion Roman Catholic
08/10/93 Ruth Bader Ginsburg Religion Jewish
08/03/94 Stephen Breyer Religion Jewish
09/29/05 John G. Roberts Religion Roman Catholic
01/31/06 Samuel Alito Religion Roman Catholic
08/06/09 Sonia Sotomayor Religion Roman Catholic
Study the symptoms not the virus...
There was a time when, outside of major metropolitan cities with large immigrant populations, Catholics couldn't run for dog catcher.
And you know, T_C, that there are plenty of liberal, progressive Catholics out there, don't you? What binds Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito to each other as a voting block isn't their religion- it's that they were all tapped by either Reagan or one of the Bushes.
BTW: Both Protestant and Jewish are pretty broad descriptions when compared to Roman Catholic, no? There's a vast difference in the perspective between a Unitarian and someone who's Dutch Reformed, or between someone who's a Liberal or Reform Jew and a Lubavitcher.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
"What binds Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito to each other as a voting block isn't their religion- it's that they were all tapped by either Reagan or one of the Bushes."
My native birthplace=RI... Patrick Kennedy, yes I know.
"The rulings demonstrate the extent to which ideology – not fidelity to precedent or a particular interpretation of the Constitution – is the driving force on the court."
Study the symptoms not the virus...
12/19/75 John Paul Stevens Religion Protestant - Democrat
09/26/86 Antonin Scalia Religion Roman Catholic - Republican
02/18/88 Anthony Kennedy Religion Roman Catholic - Republican
10/23/91 Clarence Thomas Religion Roman Catholic - Republican
08/10/93 Ruth Bader Ginsburg Religion Jewish - Democrat
08/03/94 Stephen Breyer Religion Jewish - Democrat
09/29/05 John G. Roberts Religion Roman Catholic - Republican
01/31/06 Samuel Alito Religion Roman Catholic - Republican
08/06/09 Sonia Sotomayor Religion Roman Catholic - Democrat
Should be pagan, agnostic, or deist.
We need to look for any openings from the Social Conservative side, to get them to work for us. I have no problems with alcohol and tobacco sales, the adult industry, porn at convenience stores, and strip clubs, and corporations have their hand in all, hopefully well lubricated.
Otherwise respectable corporations are involved with the cable, satellite and video porn, even making it accessible to hotels. They might open up laws in this matter, making social conservatives uneasy. Tobacco corporations might even push to legalize marijuana so they have yet another additional product to sale to us.
Oh great...now I don't know who I'm rooting for...
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
You can always look at it this way with the slave wages they will no longer outsource their business.
for "killing" Saturn, Hummer, Saab????
I thought it was Jupiter that killed Saturn.
And Moanica probably killed the name Hummer
And isn't Saab just short for Kemosaabee?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
With the current make-up of the SCOTUS, you could expect that they'd overturn Roe v. Wade if given the opportunity. Then GM might be considered an abortionist...
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
The SCOTUS members were appointed to protect the corporations. The abortion issue was a ploy to get the support of the religious right wing wingnut neocons. The religous right snake handlers will support anyone that says they are against abortion even to the demise of their democracy. The neocons knew this and used them like whores on the streetcorner.
...I see them upholding Roe v. Wade the next time it's challenged. The only reason it wasn't overturned the last few times the chance arose was because O'Connor wasn't who Reagan thought she was when he appointed her- at least as regards reproductive rights.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Though it seems most women feel that way? I don't think it's because she was an Episcopalian?
I think it's more personal myself. It's interesting how people react when it comes to their own well-being.
Study the symptoms not the virus...
On the bright side, it might make it easier to prosecute for pollution-related damages to fetuses in toxin-saturated neighborhoods.
This is where we catch the pro-life conservatives being real hypocrites.
Corporations can now donate to federal candidates! Freedom of Speech for all citzens!!
Yet an even more logical question for the Supreme Court is, if corporations are the same as natural people, are they now afforded the protections of the 13th amendment? That is they cannot be bought or sold, or owned by another natural person. So would that means that holders of stock are **it of luck; a small trade off for liberty. It would also mean that corporations would have to liberate their subsidiaries, if those subsidiaries themselves are structured as corporations.
Though corporate subsidiaries would now have equal rights, it still follows that corporations would now be able to form some type of "union" although not marriage, either with another corporation, or a with natural person. Marriage by or to a corporation might not be possible under current law, for the same legal reasoning that marriage is not currently available to gays under federal law; that procreation one of the raison d' etres of marriage is not naturally possible. Also adopted children or children from a previous marriage would not be brought up in a morally correct manner.
Another quick observation is that corporations should be paying taxes at the personal rate. As a matter of fact all corporate tax rates and tax laws are now void.
I imagine that only American born corporations are American citizens. So foreign corporations like News Corp, Toyota, Sony, etc., would have to go through the naturalization process in order to become people. As it now those corporations are "wetbacks", to use a pejorative, but all too common term.
Thanks to the Supreme Court not only can corporations donate to federal candidates, as natural born citizens corporations would also have the right to vote, and run for and hold federal office if they otherwise meet the citzen qualifications for a particular office such being age 35 or older, a resident of the appropriate district, and profess adherence to the Christian Faith, etc. To quote GW, "Let Freedom Reign!"
Another great outcome from the recent Supreme decision is that if a corporation becomes a judge there is the possibility that since some of those appointments are lifetime and corporations are practically immortal, within our own lifetimes the Supreme Court may be fixed!
In the near future Senator Walmart from Arkansas, that is the Walmart corporation itself, would also likely hold that seat for all eternity or at least until its balance sheet can effectively mount re-election campaigns every six years. That should take care of the pesky problem of public/private financing of campaigns.
As a matter of fact, logically or legally, there seems to be no impediment to a President Microsoft, General Electric or even a Midnight Bail Bonds, Inc. Finally, will have a "pro" in the White House and not some rank amateur like we have now...who by the way is not even a citizen!
you blew it!
bearsense - That happened with Grimshaw vs. Ford Motor Company. Better known as the Exploding Pinto case. Ford squealed like a little girl when they were charged criminally. I read that case years ago. It hinged on a gasket bumper thing that cost like thirty cents that they knew about. Bastards. They ran the numbers and decided to take their chances.
Personhood and Free speech my ass ,these two rulings are an absolute absurdity , it's simply a matter of these Republican appointed right wing hack activist Supreme court judges , fascists , and the Republican party being a subsidiary of the corporations and they are creating a fascist state right before your eyes . If you don't think this will have an effect on Democracy in this country or the pseudo Democracy I should say , you need your friggin head examined . Do corporations now have the right to bare arms ? Good question , here's another one , people / investors own corporations , if a corporation is a person then I guess they have just done away with laws prohibiting slavery and owning another human being didn't they ! These right wing judges on the Supreme court have turned the highest court in the country into an absolute fraud , a sham and are no less than treasonous saboteurs . They like anyone with an ounce of common sense know the intent of the founding fathers , the basis of the country was a government for and by the people and they did their best to insure that we the people are represented and in effect own the government , not the rich , not the corporations . It's F'n simple but the wingers and these fascists have no conscience , no ethics and no integrity , none , the Constitution is to them just a meaningless piece of paper ( and a pain in their ass ) like Cheney said . They are fascists and barring a major league revolt by the people they are winning and taking over .
On the Commerce Clause?
Study the symptoms not the virus...
you deserve to be shot
so, if a company is dying to to lack of lifeblood (profits), would the hospital, on the tax payers expense, be forced to provide ER services, in order to save their lives? that is, pump them up with cash?
The latest ruling by the fascists on the SCOTUS is a bold-lettered, unequivocal, unambiguous, glaring, clear, succinct, impossible to ignore STATEMENT that the idea of a citizen-based democracy as laid out in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is OVER/DEAD/DONE/BURIED/SHREDDED/STOMPED/GONE.
If you can, get the fuck out of the US and try to start a new life somewhere else. Try Canada, the Scandanavian countries or New Zealand.
DO IT!
"Secular humanism -- a fearless, realistic world view replete with doubt and scepticism that attempts to attain an unachievable state of equilibrium between and among the human qualities of reason, intuition, imagination, memory, ethics and common sense.
must be a process for that possibility.......
of the Constitution. A continental congress. See Gore Vidal for details.
"Secular humanism -- a fearless, realistic world view replete with doubt and scepticism that attempts to attain an unachievable state of equilibrium between and among the human qualities of reason, intuition, imagination, memory, ethics and common sense.
May be the last chance to get foreign corporations out of the USA political system.
Corporations being seen as people goes back to the 1880s (I'm too tired to look up the actual case again, but something very close to Santa Clara County v Pacific Railroad). Still stupid, but hardly a new form of stupid.
But you might also note that nobody actually argued that in this case (or at least it didn't figure into either the majority or dissenting opinions).
And as many have noted; yes, corporations already have no problem with arming themselves.
If corporations are entitled to the same rights as individuals, should they then also be required to pay the same income taxes as individuals?
Comments are closed on this entry