What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Patman said:
The non constitutional issue is whether or not a company should be brought to its knees because they don't want to purchase birth control for employees.

But we ignore this in the usual flame war.

We are implicitly dictating what a lawful organization should believe.
Click to expand...
My organization doesn't believe in Social Security, so we're not going to pay that.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

I don't believe in drone strikes so I can refuse to pay taxes. Yippie!
 
Patman said:
The non constitutional issue is whether or not a company should be brought to its knees because they don't want to purchase birth control for employees.

But we ignore this in the usual flame war.

We are implicitly dictating what a lawful organization should believe.
Click to expand...

My religion says I can only pay people two fish and two loaves of bread per day. I should be exempt from minimum wage laws, right?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

This
Priceless said:
No, you aren't. The idea behind these health measures is to reduce the number of abortions. You don't support fewer abortions?
Click to expand...
followed by this
Priceless said:
No, why don't you tell us all what Drudge, hotair, Rush Limbaugh, Faux "News" or whatever other black helicopter site has told you.
Click to expand...
is just too funny for words
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

ScoobyDoo said:
Oh, NOES!!!! That's the socialism.
Click to expand...

Rover said:
You know, for such an astute SCOTUS watcher, Fishy sure seems to miss a lot of headlines when a ruling doesn't go his way!

http://swampland.time.com/2013/12/0...n=Feed:+timeblogs/swampland+(TIME:+Swampland)

Now comes to part about how this isn't reallly a loss because....
Click to expand...

I saw it. Disagree with it, but waiting for the other cases to get decided by SCOTUS.

Somewhat related -- could the Feds force the remaining Seven Sisters schools to admit men?
 
joecct said:
I saw it. Disagree with it, but waiting for the other cases to get decided by SCOTUS.

Somewhat related -- could the Feds force the remaining Seven Sisters schools to admit men?
Click to expand...

Some already do, just as there are a handful of white students at historically black universities. Title IX cuts both ways, I'm guessing the courts could force the issue.

Edit: I've seen some reference to women's colleges being exempt from title ix, but nothing official on my cursory glance. So take that for what it's worth. Likewise, title ix only applies to institutions which accept federal funds, but I can all but guarantee that the seven sisters schools accept federal funds.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

I just don't see how you can claim a religious exemption if you're not set up as a religious organization. The impact of doing otherwise would be enormous. No spousal benefits to interracial couples. No compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Where does it end exactly?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Rover said:
I just don't see how you can claim a religious exemption if you're not set up as a religious organization. The impact of doing otherwise would be enormous. No spousal benefits to interracial couples. No compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Where does it end exactly?
Click to expand...

I dunno. Ask Bob though cause he thinks that if the Supreme Court doesn't allow Corporations to have religious exemptions we're basically North Korea.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

ScoobyDoo said:
I dunno. Ask Bob though cause he thinks that if the Supreme Court doesn't allow Corporations to have religious exemptions we're basically North Korea.
Click to expand...

I learned long ago to not expect sensible comments on this issue from Bob! ;) (settle down Bob, I'm just kidding).

You do bring up a good point though, which is the tortured logic conservatives will apply to oppose this. While its far before my time, I can see how the same thing might have happened in opposition to Civil Rights (which, we should note for the sake of accuracy, was also opposed by conservatives).

Its basically an ideology not just stuck in time, but with an overarching desire to go backwards. :confused:
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

Rover said:
I learned long ago to not expect sensible comments on this issue from Bob! ;) (settle down Bob, I'm just kidding).

You do bring up a good point though, which is the tortured logic conservatives will apply to oppose this. While its far before my time, I can see how the same thing might have happened in opposition to Civil Rights (which, we should note for the sake of accuracy, was also opposed by conservatives).

Its basically an ideology not just stuck in time, but with an overarching desire to go backwards. :confused:
Click to expand...

Here's the amazing part in my eyes.

We already give corporations rights that individuals do not have. If we are indeed going to declare them individuals by giving them the same rights then perhaps we should rescind the special rights afforded to them.
The law also gives corporations special legal status: limited liability, special rules for the accumulation of assets and the ability to live forever. These rules put corporations in a privileged position in producing profits and aggregating wealth. Their influence would be overwhelming with the full array of rights that people have.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/opinion/22tue1.html?_r=0

So, if we give corporations all the rights of individuals then it is time to eliminate their limited liability, special rules for the accumulation of assets and the ability to live forever. That will potentially level the playing field.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

ScoobyDoo said:
Here's the amazing part in my eyes.

We already give corporations rights that individuals do not have. If we are indeed going to declare them individuals by giving them the same rights then perhaps we should rescind the special rights afforded to them.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/opinion/22tue1.html?_r=0

So, if we give corporations all the rights of individuals then it is time to eliminate their limited liability, special rules for the accumulation of assets and the ability to live forever. That will potentially level the playing field.
Click to expand...
"all the rights of individuals?" Please. Nobody is arguing for that. If you want to make that claim, please find examples where someone has argued that a corporation should have the right to:

1) get married
2) be awarded custody of a child
3) have power of attorney over an individual's heath care decisions

etc. etc.

Nobody is arguing for that strawman; please put it to bed.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

LynahFan said:
"all the rights of individuals?" Please. Nobody is arguing for that. If you want to make that claim, please find examples where someone has argued that a corporation should have the right to:

1) get married
2) be awarded custody of a child
3) have power of attorney over an individual's heath care decisions

etc. etc.

Nobody is arguing for that strawman; please put it to bed.
Click to expand...

Strawman??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2h8ujX6T0A
http://money.howstuffworks.com/corporation-person1.htm
http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Prote...porate+Dominance+and+the+Theft+of+Human+Right

No, no strawman. Not at all.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS IV: Gays, Guns, and Immigrants, OH MY!

ScoobyDoo said:
Strawman??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
Click to expand...
"This doctrine forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations...may hold and exercise certain rights"

http://money.howstuffworks.com/corporation-person1.htmp
Click to expand...
In this opinion-laced slant piece, it does bother to mention that Nike was found NOT to have the right to lie, as an individual does. Oops. Strike 2.

http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Prote...porate+Dominance+and+the+Theft+of+Human+Right
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not going to buy a book, especially one that may or may not address my question - I didn't ask whether corporations were a dominant force in society. I asked if anyone is arguing that they should have child custody rights. Well, is anyone? Still waiting for an example of that.

(can't watch youtube at work, but I'm pretty confident that won't be the example I'm looking for, either)

Do you honestly think that corporations should have NO rights at all? If you think that they should have any single right, then you buy into the idea of corporate personhood in general - the only question then is which rights corporations do and do not have, which is just a policy discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top