View Poll Results: Should Corproations have "personhood" rights?

Voters
99. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, corporations are just like a person

    18 18.18%
  • No, corporations are not just like a person

    81 81.82%
Page 24 of 71 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 710

Thread: Corporate Personhood

  1. #231
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    If a person joins the A.A.R.P. or the N.R.A. they do so because they agree with the N.R.A/ AARP 's lobbying positions.
    Actually, I would hazard a guess that many of them join because they agree with most of those organizations lobbying positions. Not all. Probably a few join who don't agree at all, however odd that might be.

    But, essentially, you are correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    That is completely untrue of a corporation. Who is even "speaking" when a corporation pays for an ad to support or attack a candidate? The employee? Certainly not. The Shareholder? Doubtful. Even the C.E.O. or board of directors may well consent to buy ads that run contrary to their personal views and preferences because they have a fiduciary responsibility to do so. The Corporations is an artificial legal construct and "political expression' has nothing to do with individuals gathering to express themselves.
    Not necessarily. Some employees may agree entirely with the political positions of the corporation they work for.

    But also essentially correct.

    However, I would argue that as both the A.A.R.P and the N.R.A take political positions which benefit their members, so also do corporations take political positions which benefit their members.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #232
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Yes there is. The Constitution.


    Again you ignore the Constitution. Try reading it.
    Says the guy who doesn't know the first thing about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Even if one accepted the ludicrous idea that the First Amendment does apply to corporations even though it doesn't mention them...

    "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
    You have a hard time understanding the difference between "people" and "corporations".
    Holy ****.

    Dude, the fact that the 9th amendment refers to "the people" does not mean that everything else in the Constitution is only applicable to the people. This is some basic stuff.

    Since you obviously didn't bother to read the thread, I'll do you the favor of linking to a post where this was explained.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/...post1058506490

    But hey, by all means, you obviously know much better than the SC.
    Last edited by RightinNYC; 01-24-10 at 06:57 PM.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  3. #233
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,534

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Only for people who can't read the constitution... like the 5 republican judges on the SCOTUS.
    Because YOU say so?



    Is that supposed to be some kind of intelligent argument or are you simply exercising your right?
    I'm saying that "corporations" are a boogeyman, and when the "problems" that keeping corporate money out of political advertising are supposed to solve don't actually GET solved, you'll have to find something else to blame, and to outlaw, no doubt.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  4. #234
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,534

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    1) it was an analogy and a poor one as I noted.
    Yes, it was a tangentially relevant analogy.

    2) It's not opinion it's FACT. When a sperm fuses with an egg it creates a zygote. A zygote is a single-cell that contains two copies of chromosomes—one copy from each parent. In the week following fertilization, the zygote undergoes rapid cell division and becomes a mass of cells known as a blastocyst. After more cell division, the blastocyst splits in half.

    Now you are aware of the fact.


    The opinion is whether or not the zygote represents a person. Your opinion is that it does not. His is that it does.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  5. #235
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,534

    Re: Should Corporations Have Personhood?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Then dispute it instead of just barking.
    No, you prove it, becuse you are the one making the factual assertion.

    But you won't be able to, because you pulled it out of thin air.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #236
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,534

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Even if one accepted the ludicrous idea that the First Amendment does apply to corporations even though it doesn't mention them...

    "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
    You have a hard time understanding the difference between "people" and "corporations".
    You are having a hard time understanding the scope of the Bill of Rights.

    What a thing, having a philosophy which requires you to come up with novel ways to diminish the scope of protection it affords.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  7. #237
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Should Corporations Have Personhood?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    No, you prove it, becuse you are the one making the factual assertion.

    But you won't be able to, because you pulled it out of thin air.
    And it was really thin air to begin with...
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  8. #238
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,534

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    There is no inconsistency with my view. I didn't say the NYT was a group. "The Press" (in 1776) was the vehicle (print media) responsible for gathering and publishing news.
    "Freedom of the press" is not "freedom of a form a media." It's a freedom of anyone to publish, to create and distribute words on a page. It's an action, not a thing.

    You really don't understand this stuff, do you?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #239
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    "Freedom of the press" is not "freedom of a form a media." It's a freedom of anyone to publish, to create and distribute words on a page. It's an action, not a thing.

    You really don't understand this stuff, do you?
    I always thought it was "freedom of the press".

    As in, the actual "press" which was used to print the news sheets.

    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  10. #240
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I don't really know what else to say, because you're simply wrong on this. A quote from a layman's explanation of what the Bill of Rights supposedly means does not trump the actual text of the Constitution and years of jurisprudence. The first amendment applies to more than just individuals. If you don't want to take my word for it, take the Supreme Court's:

    From First Nat Bank v. Bellotti:

    This is well settled law.
    The Bill of Rights was meant for individuals, faulty interpretations by the Supreme Court does not change this.

    They are bat**** insane to believe that a corporation, that is not alive, has no possible way of expressing itself and is not a human, can have rights.

    It basic anthropomorphism.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Where are you getting this from?
    GM is nothing but a brand for which a business operates.
    GM is not a living person nor can it talk, move, or express emotion.

    It can not hire anyone, only a person can hire someone else.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Again, this doesn't make any sense. The Catholic church is the one paying the salaries of priests. If government passed a law forbidding the expenditure of money on priests, that would be analogous to government passing a law forbidding corporations to spend money on advertising. Using your framework, because neither one is technically a person, they have no rights and those laws would be fine. If you want to say that the individual members of the catholic church are having their freedom of religion infringed by such a law, then you would have to say that the individual members of a corporation would be having their freedom of speech infringed by such a law.
    The individuals can say whatever they want but a church and corporation can not.
    A church cannot talk, cannot express itself, does not have a brain.

    Laws that restrict the establishment of a church which is required for one person to practice religion, infringe on that one person's right to religion.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    And as explained above, this is incorrect.
    Faulty interpretations don't make for good arguments.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    So your theory is that because you think it would be inefficient, that somehow means they shouldn't be allowed to do it?
    That's not it at all, I was just saying that the reasons for grouping are not always more efficient in lobbying for a specific individuals cause.

    To be honest this isn't my main objection to corporate personhood.
    My biggest problem is the deferment of liability.
    Last edited by Harry Guerrilla; 01-24-10 at 07:43 PM.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 24 of 71 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •