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 55 of 71 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 550 of 710

Thread: Corporate Personhood

  1. #541
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    The rights are for people... as individuals... NOT political parties, not corporations.
    Ah, so political parties have no constitutional rights, including freedom of speech.

    Whatever you say!

    Religious freedom is not being discussed here. Quit trying to side-step the point.
    Religious freedom isn't a constitutional right that the people, among perhaps others, have?

    Whatever you say!

    The right has always had difficulty accepting the fact that their big business friends are only protected as individuals. The right cannot accept that their businesses are NOT entitled to 1st Amendment protections outside of that which is provided to each individual employee.
    Over a hundred years of court cases say you're wrong, but hey, you're getting used to that.

    Of course, anytime the right cannot buy off a politican or create a law that favors them and their SIGs, the right gets bitchy and whiney.
    I'm not the right. I'm from the left of the aisle.

  2. #542
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Ah, so political parties have no constitutional rights, including freedom of speech.

    Whatever you say!
    The individuals have those rights. Corporations as a group do not. Accept it and move on.

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Religious freedom isn't a constitutional right that the people, among perhaps others, have?
    Actually, what I said was "Where not discussing religious freedom" ... but you can spin it any way you want.

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    I'm not the right. I'm from the left of the aisle.
    Then quit acting like a riche-wing dinzien. The right is wrong on this issue and so are you.

  3. #543
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    The individuals have those rights. Corporations as a group do not. Accept it and move on.
    Hey, you're the one who talked yourself into saying political parties have no freedom of speech. Don't blame me.

    Actually, what I said was "Where not discussing religious freedom" ... but you can spin it any way you want.
    Yes, we were discussing religious freedom. You said only people have constitutional rights, and religious freedom is a constitutional right. That means religious groups like churches have no religious freedom, according to you.

    Then quit acting like a riche-wing dinzien. The right is wrong on this issue and so are you.
    It's too bad you can't learn something from this instead of just digging your heels in no matter how preposterous it makes you.

  4. #544
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Hey, you're the one who talked yourself into saying political parties have no freedom of speech. Don't blame me.
    I am just following the designed purpose of the Constitution as our forefathers intended.

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Yes, we were discussing religious freedom. You said only people have constitutional rights, and religious freedom is a constitutional right. That means religious groups like churches have no religious freedom, according to you.
    No, WE are not. YOU are ... in a rather poor attempt at side-stepping the conversation.

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    It's too bad you can't learn something from this instead of just digging your heels in no matter how preposterous it makes you.
    I am merely arguing the Constitution as it was written. You are arguing it as the politicos WISH it was written.

  5. #545
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    No I don't.
    OK, you're on the right track then.

    Doesn't matter one bit when it comes to freedom of speech. The first amendment protects speech, regardless of its source.
    The only things that can speak are people. Don't bother trying to be cute and telling us your pooch can "speak".

    Yeah, those people. They are people.
    Yeah, those people. They are people but they are not all the people who work there. So one could say, that the corporations executives/shareholders get to speak for the employees who may not agree. They are after all, speaking through the use of corporate funds which most employees do not have access to. So in two instances the some of the people are at a disadvantage in their free speech in comparison to the owner.

  6. #546
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    I can find non-persons that have rights under the Constitution - even in the First Amendment.
    Yes you can find 2 others because they are specifically listed and corporations are not. To the intellectually honest this should prove that no other entities were considered to have these rights protected because they don't have them automatically as "people" do.
    Religion doesn't have any "inalienable rights" therefore the Constitution specifically protects them by name. Same with the Press.

    And corporations clearly have other Constitutional rights, this is not in dispute.
    That's true. The dispute is whether or not they should have them.

    And the Constitution protects speech, regardless of its source.
    You have a lack of evidence as your evidence.

  7. #547
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    The rights are for people... as individuals... NOT political parties, not corporations.

    Religious freedom is not being discussed here. Quit trying to side-step the point.

    The constitution was designed to protect the individual American citizen from government persuction. It was not intended to protect big business and political groups from the consequcnes of their personal attacks.

    The right has always had difficulty accepting the fact that their big business friends are only protected as individuals. The right cannot accept that their businesses are NOT entitled to 1st Amendment protections outside of that which is provided to each individual employee.

    Of course, anytime the right cannot buy off a politican or create a law that favors them and their SIGs, the right gets bitchy and whiney.
    Actually I think misterman is a lefty, he's just confused on this point about the constitution.

  8. #548
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Actually I think misterman is a lefty, he's just confused on this point about the constitution.
    Oh. Ok.

    Well hopefully we can help end his confusion.


  9. #549
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    I am just following the designed purpose of the Constitution as our forefathers intended.
    If you think so. Not a single judge does.

    No, WE are not. YOU are ... in a rather poor attempt at side-stepping the conversation.
    No I"m not. I couldn't be more on topic. I'm talking about the First Amendment.

    I am merely arguing the Constitution as it was written. You are arguing it as the politicos WISH it was written.
    Your views don't even reflect a strictly literal interpretation of the words as written.

  10. #550
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,751

    Re: Corporate Personhood

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    I'm sorry but your premise about the corporate funds is plainly wrong. You did give it an effort though. They are not directly nor indirectly accessible by all of the corporations employees. I'm sorry that you are wrong but you are.
    But I’m not wrong.
    Employees of a corporation do have indirect access to corporation funds...via their paycheck, at the very least.
    They do not control those funds, except through how they do their jobs, which affects the company to a degree, depending on its size.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    And it would be reasonable to assume as much.
    Excellent, we agree on that at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    OK, now the question is: Who does the economy serve? The People or Corporations?
    Both, as they are one and the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Do we simply allow corporations to do anything they want to improve their profitability regardless of the damage it might do to "The People" either directly (i.e. poisoning a community's water supply) or indirectly (i.e. causing banking failures)?
    Obviously, some actions a corporation makes can cause harm to individuals or communities. Additionally obvious is that those actions can be attributed to individuals working for said corporation. Our laws against such need reinforcement in some places, and perhaps rewriting (i.e. legislation) in others. And such laws need to be strictly enforced. Consequences need to be known and harsh, to discourage corporations from doing such.
    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Obviously we do not just simply allow corporations "to get away with" damages but only if caught. We rarely do anything proactively to PREVENT corporations from doing damage. This is because the corporate lobby controls our legislature. We only attempt to fix damages by legislative fingers in the dam. Those fingers are of course directed by corporate interest and in all cases that I am aware of, end up opening other doors or the "fixes" are short lived and overturned or "refixed" to open a door by the congress at some later point when less people are scrutinizing.
    This is not a problem of corporations. This is a problem of politicians.

    Sure, corporations might be influencing politicians to an extent, and in some cases, a great extent. Their constituents need to fire them, if necessary.

    But corporate influence of politicians is simply a extension of individual influence, namely by those who control said corporation.

    To take away the use of their funds is to take away part of their free speech.
    Last edited by The Mark; 02-02-10 at 09:12 PM.
    Education.

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

Page 55 of 71 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... 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
  •