Skip to main content

View Diary: Supreme Court will hear Obamacare contraception challenges (276 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here is the question (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mconvente, apimomfan2

    to ask the right wing fundamentalist Republicans.
     Ask them if a person has a spirit or soul, and if a corporation has one also.. if the corporation do not, how can they be considered the same as a person, and have the same rights? Make the argument about the spirit. It will split the Republican party down the middle.

    •  This is silly. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      this has nothing to do with whether "corporations are people."  Zero.  Zilch.  

      Nowhere in the CU decision does the court say "corporations are persons."  And the CU decision is NOT based on corporate personhood.  That's a myth.  

      •  not a myth (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mconvente, apimomfan2, Capt Crunch

        and they don't have to explicitly say "corporations are people" in order to establish that they have the same rights as people.  Anyone capable of thinking beyond a grade school level knows it.  

        •  Sigh. Perhaps you should try, just once, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          actually READING the opinion.  I'll make it easy for you:  It's here.

          Let me give you an express quote from page 26, where the majority frames the issue:

          "This Court has thus rejected the argument that political speech of corporations should be treated differently under the First Amendment simply because such associations are not natural persons."  

          The majority expressly STATES that corporations are not "natural persons."  Read it for yourself.

          •  You are willfully blind (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Capt Crunch

            The whole of the sentence before your boldface is the Court laying the foundations of the argument that corporations should have the same rights as natural persons.

            Corporations should NOT have the same bundle of legal rights as natural persons. But Citizens United gives them the same 1st Amendment rights as natural persons - specifically, they can spend as much money as they want for campaign spending, because thanks to prior SC decisions, money = political speech. So for the purposes of the First Amendment, and specifically campaign spending, corporations have now become equivalent to natural persons.

            You are the reincarnation of Roger B. Taney, who started from the then-legally correct (but factually and morally wrong) premise that African-American slaves are not persons but property, and decided Dred Scott accordingly from a property perspective.

          •  Geeeeze - you ignored red rabbit's point (0+ / 0-)

            and went off on a fantasy post.

            they don't have to explicitly say "corporations are people" in order to establish that they have the same rights as people.

            Get it?
            It's so simple. I don't know how you can't grasp it.
            The court can say anything.
            The point is that if the court grants those rights to corporations then... that is what the court has done - no matter what the court said.
            How hard can that be to understand?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site