Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
"True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero
Except it wasn't. The First amendment clearly says NO laws abridging freedom of speech. That's it. Nothing about having to be a person, or vote, or any of that. You may think that's the way it ought to be, but it's not.527s should be outlawed as well. No one or no thing should be allowed to influence our elections beyond a vote. If you can't vote then you shouldn't have the ability to influence elections other than YOUR OWN VOICE. I believe this was the way our country was founded, it's the way our Constitution was written and it's the way it should be. Activist judges have changed those things by giving non-human entities a voice in our politics.
Last edited by misterman; 02-03-10 at 03:08 PM.
The light of disclosure always is better than behind the scenes....See, the real rub, maybe not with you, but with many liberals, is that Unions, and 537's Center for American Progress won't be able to work together anymore to hide this. And as for the CfAP, I'd like to see also what role they played in garnering Obama's foreign donations to his campaign....He refuses to release that info, I'd bet it is exactly the thing you are afraid will happen with this ruling already happening on the demo ticket.
Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
Alexis de Tocqueville
The Constitution doesn't grant any rights, it protects the right of citizens from the government.
Corporations are granted license to operate (i.e. exist). The government can go to any corporation and revoke it's charter, unlike a citizen (i.e. person).
"Amendment I (1791)Except it wasn't. The First amendment clearly says NO laws abridging freedom of speech. That's it. Nothing about having to be a person, or vote, or any of that. You may think that's the way it ought to be, but it's not.
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."
Could you please tell us how many periods are in that paragraph and where those periods are located in the text?
You're right that shining a light on this is better than allowing it to stay in the shadows. This will affect some voters who are not ideologically entrenched in their party (those are few and far between though). But they are still being allowed to influence elections with money that the average American cannot compete with.