The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

What do these non sequiters have to do with freedom of the press, or the right of people peacably to assemble to petition their government?


Are you suggesting that we need to repeal the First Amendment and replace it with something else?

What part of Corporations only exist on paper don't you understand?

 

[BassAle]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Likewise when people say the Earth is only 6000 years old, they are not being rational and it will cast doubt on everything else they claim as fact.

A literal interpretation of the Bible is a real problem. People completely ignore science because some book written before modern science even existed uses a bunch of stories to try to teach them a moral lesson. I am no longer religious, but I'm glad that when I was a kid my parents took me to Catholic church rather than some fundamentalist church. I clearly remember a priest saying during his homily that the story of Genesis was just a parable, the earth was not created in 6 days, etc.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVOonvm1qOg


If you truly believe the earth is only 6000 years old then you are a moron. There is no need to be tolerant of complete ignorance. Fundamentalist Christianity is hurting society.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

A literal interpretation of the Bible is a real problem. People completely ignore science because some book written before modern science even existed uses a bunch of stories to try to teach them a moral lesson. I am no longer religious, but I'm glad that when I was a kid my parents took me to Catholic church rather than some fundamentalist church. I clearly remember a priest saying during his homily that the story of Genesis was just a parable, the earth was not created in 6 days, etc.

Smart Priest. Sounds like one I would enjoy listening to.

 

[LynahFan]

Well, for one, the right to pay zero taxes (General Electric) and the right to declare myself a citizen of another country for the sole purpose of paying zero taxes (Mylan). Somehow I'm not afforded those rights. There's also the one about how if I get sued it's the corporation getting sued not me personally.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/ehvwjx/inversion-of-the-money-snatchers

There is no "right" for anyone to pay zero (or any other amount of) taxes. That's simply an OUTCOME of the tax code that Congress has lawfully enacted. How did I just know you were going to screw that up?

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Well, for one, the right to pay zero taxes (General Electric) and the right to declare myself a citizen of another country for the sole purpose of paying zero taxes (Mylan).

Tax wise, there things you can do. Please consult your tax adviser. And you can drop your US citizenship.

 

[busterman62]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

I wish I could kill people indiscriminately, swindle them out of money, ruin their lives and only have to pay a paltry fine. Immortality would be nice too.

If you didn't throw this caveat in, you could be the Government.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

There is no "right" for anyone to pay zero (or any other amount of) taxes. That's simply an OUTCOME of the tax code that Congress has lawfully enacted. How did I just know you were going to screw that up?

LOL

Which part of coporations only exist on paper do you not understand? Since they only exist on paper they cannot have Constitutional Rights. Why? Because Constitutional rights are for the People.

Outcomes may be irrelevant to you but they are the tangible evidence that proves the Constitution has been brought out, burned, and stomped on.

Oh, and here's another "outcome" for ya. Corporations don't pay estate taxes.

 

[LynahFan]

LOL

Which part of coporations only exist on paper do you not understand? Since they only exist on paper they cannot have Constitutional Rights. Why? Because Constitutional rights are for the People.

Outcomes may be irrelevant to you but they are the tangible evidence that proves the Constitution has been brought out, burned, and stomped on.

Do corporations enjoy the right of sanctity of contracts? That is every bit as much of a Constitutional right as freedom of speech.

 

[busterman62]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Then give me the same rights as a corporation.

Link

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Do corporations enjoy the right of sanctity of contracts? That is every bit as much of a Constitutional right as freedom of speech.

Since corporations only exist on paper they are only afforded the rights that we the People give them.

Try again.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Still waiting to hear whether corporations can go to jail or not...they are people after all.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Still waiting to hear whether corporations can go to jail or not...they are people after all.

or vote...

 

[LynahFan]

Since corporations only exist on paper they are only afforded the rights that we the People give them.

Try again.

Um...how is that different from individuals' rights to free speech? People only have those rights because We the People said they should have them and wrote it down in the Constitution. There is no other basis for any right - for people or for corporations. We dropped the whole "endowed by their Creator" canard between 1776 and 1789.

If We the People choose to give a corporation the right of sanctity of contracts and enshrine it in the Constitution, we can (and we have) - there is no higher power stopping us.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

What part of Corporations only exist on paper don't you understand?

how does this non sequiter address the question of freedom of the press and the right of people peacably to assemble to petition their government?

are you also saying you want to repeal the first amendment and replace it with something else?

 

[Priceless]

how does this non sequiter address the question of freedom of the press and the right of people peacably to assemble to petition their government?

are you also saying you want to repeal the first amendment and replace it with something else?

It isn't that difficult to understand. You're just being intentionally obtuse.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

It isn't that difficult to understand.

Of course not. At the same time, one has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

You are studiously avoiding the question at hand, throwing up all sorts of distractions: you clearly want some peacable assemblies to have free speech rights while you want other peacable assemblies not to have free speech rights. Yet you don't want to admit it outright.

Whether corporations are "people" or not doesn't matter. The plain text of the First Amendment is obvious enough. "People have the right...to peacably assemble, to petition the government." You want to edit that to read "People have the right...to peacably assemble, to petition the government, but only in forms of which I approve, and not in forms of which I do not approve."

It will be interesting to see how you ultimately word your revision. Both political parties are organized in corporate form, you know...and labor unions are organized in corporate form too. So in your world, some corporations do have free speech rights, while others do not.

or are you saying that you don't want labor unions to be able to make political contributions, because they are organized in corporate form, and no corporate entities should have the right to make political contributions?



See, the question at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with whether corporations are people, or not. The question is merely, do corporations have the right to make political contributions? if no, then that excludes labor unions too.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Of course not. At the same time, one has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

You are studiously avoiding the question at hand, throwing up all sorts of distractions: you clearly want some peacable assemblies to have free speech rights while you want other peacable assemblies not to have free speech rights. Yet you don't want to admit it outright.

Whether corporations are "people" or not doesn't matter. The plain text of the First Amendment is obvious enough. "People have the right...to peacably assemble, to petition the government." You want to edit that to read "People have the right...to peacably assemble, to petition the government, but only in forms of which I approve, and not in forms of which I do not approve."

It will be interesting to see how you ultimately word your revision. Both political parties are organized in corporate form, you know...and labor unions are organized in corporate form too. So in your world, some corporations do have free speech rights, while others do not.

or are you saying that you don't want labor unions to be able to make political contributions, because they are organized in corporate form, and no corporate entities should have the right to make political contributions?



See, the question at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with whether corporations are people, or not. The question is merely, do corporations have the right to make political contributions? if no, then that excludes labor unions too.

Yep. Cause whatever the NHL is doing also applies to whatever the Pee Wee's are doing.

 

[Priceless]

Of course not. At the same time, one has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

You are studiously avoiding the question at hand, throwing up all sorts of distractions: you clearly want some peacable assemblies to have free speech rights while you want other peacable assemblies not to have free speech rights. Yet you don't want to admit it outright.

Whether corporations are "people" or not doesn't matter. The plain text of the First Amendment is obvious enough. "People have the right...to peacably assemble, to petition the government." You want to edit that to read "People have the right...to peacably assemble, to petition the government, but only in forms of which I approve, and not in forms of which I do not approve."

It will be interesting to see how you ultimately word your revision. Both political parties are organized in corporate form, you know...and labor unions are organized in corporate form too. So in your world, some corporations do have free speech rights, while others do not.

or are you saying that you don't want labor unions to be able to make political contributions, because they are organized in corporate form, and no corporate entities should have the right to make political contributions?



See, the question at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with whether corporations are people, or not. The question is merely, do corporations have the right to make political contributions? if no, then that excludes labor unions too.

Maybe you do understand. PEOPLE have rights. CORPORATIONS do not. Congratulations.

 

[joecct]

Maybe you do understand. PEOPLE have rights. CORPORATIONS do not. Congratulations.

Not according to 200+ years of legal precedent.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The Power of SCOTUS V: The Final Frontier

Still waiting...this shouldn't be too hard to answer since you are all so well versed on The Constitution and legal precedent. None of you want to go out on a limb? Should I email Charles Krauthammer and have him answer it for you?