Yes, corporations are just like a person
No, corporations are not just like a person
THe 1st amendment says 1 thing.
A) Congress shall make no law...
and then it details 3 things that A is talking about:
1) respecting an establishment of religion (religion as an idea which includes all religions) or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
2) abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press
3) the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Nowhere does it say anything like, and all entities not specifically listed.
Now, who or what was the Constitution written for?
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
There is nothing there to lead anyone to believe that they are trying to ensure a more perfect union for corporations. Nor does it say establish justice for corporations. nor insure domestic tranquility for corporations. nor provide for the common defense for corporations. nor promote the general welfare of corporations. nor secure the blessings of liberty for corporations. In fact the word "corporation" does not appear anywhere in the preamble nor the body of the Constitution. Including everything not specifically listed is plainly wrong. CAn tree have the blessings of liberty? Can my house have justice?
The Constitution was written for the people, not for their corporations because there are separate laws for them.
You're reading it to include entities that are not listed. That interpretation is wrong.
How could I think that when religion and the press are specifically mentioned?Yes, exactly. So you think the government could shut down all religious entities and still be respecting freedom of religion, or all newspapers and still be respecting freedom of the press.
Corporations do not have inalienable rights endowed by their creator, therefore they must be granted them. No we are not following the Constitution, we seem to be interpreting it for corporate interests.It's not a matter of what we "need to grant." We have no choice. We are not writing the Constitution here, we are following it.
I can't even fathom how you built that strawman but maybe you could enlighten me on your presumption.And you are presuming that corporations will have all the rights that people have, but that's not necessarily true.
The free press is the idea we want to protect from the government. The people who work for a company involved in the free press have rights as people under the constitution.Not the "idea" - the newspaper. Please stop playing with words. A newspaper is a business, it - not just the people working there - is protected.
Understanding this leads you to the conclusion that corporations were never intended to be considered anything more than a vehicle to conduct business separate from personal activities.
I assure you that you are mistaken.Without actually posting my resume, I assure you that I have a deep knowledge of both the intricacies of the English language and how to interpret laws and the Constitution. Please stick to the topic.
You're being obtuse as usual in this thread. The RCC is simply the name of that religious cult. It is part of the RELIGION of Christianity.An organization. Like the Roman Catholic Church, which has leaders, assets, a governing structure (much like a corporation.) You know, like in "seperation of church and state." Not a physical location, an organization. Could the government ban the Roman Catholic Church from the US? As long as Catholics can gather in a basement?
So you do understand the concept but constantly pretend you don't by asking if the government could shut down the church.Do I really have to explain that "church" can also mean "religious organization?" Here, the rest of the definitions from your link:
3. (sometimes initial capital letter) the whole body of Christian believers; Christendom.
4. (sometimes initial capital letter) any division of this body professing the same creed and acknowledging the same ecclesiastical authority; a Christian denomination: the Methodist Church.
5. that part of the whole Christian body, or of a particular denomination, belonging to the same city, country, nation, etc.
6. a body of Christians worshipping in a particular building or constituting one congregation: She is a member of this church.
7. ecclesiastical organization, power, and affairs, as distinguished from the state: separation of church and state; The missionary went wherever the church sent him.
8. the clergy and religious officials of a Christian denomination.
9. the Christian faith: a return of intellectuals to the church.
10. (initial capital letter) the Christian Church before the Reformation.
11. (initial capital letter) the Roman Catholic Church.
12. the clerical profession or calling: After much study and contemplation, he was prepared to enter the church.
13. a place of public worship of a non-Christian religion.
14. any non-Christian religious society, organization, or congregation: the Jewish church.
Sorry Bodhisattva, his constant use of that same argument is tedious.
I've already clearly established that the preamble has no legal force, nor does it say the Constitution was written "for" people, only "by the people."Now, who or what was the Constitution written for?
We the people of the United States,
People own and control corporations. The distinction is silly. This is about what bank account can buy advertising, by people.The Constitution was written for the people, not for their corporations because there are separate laws for them.
Do I need to cite that, or can you find it yourself?
It's nine amendments below the first one.
The people don't lose their freedoms just because they own stock in a company.