Yes...trade unions have just as much right as...well, corporations and all the rest of us. They're people too.
You thinking I wouldn't agree with this? Is this what got you all excited?
lol
Yes, we are having fun...
Such a lazy and weak argument:
People have rights.
Corporations are formed, owned, and ran by people.
Thus, corporations in and of themselves have rights.
Any guess as to where the weakness of your argument is?
Yes...trade unions have just as much right as...well, corporations and all the rest of us. They're people too.
You thinking I wouldn't agree with this? Is this what got you all excited?
lol
Yes, we are having fun...
You're consistent in your block-headedness, I'll give you that.
LOL...any guess to where your logic is flawed?
Corporations are not some non-peopled-en y.
They don't exist without people.
Since corporations don't exist without people, they can't have any rights without people. Because, y'know...they don't exist.
So...ragging on corporations, is ragging on the people who chartered them, and/or work in them. Since corporations are people, those people have all the same rights as well....you.
You are simply trying to seperate a Corporation from the people who create and work for it. Easier to make an "it" rather than a "them"... into baddies I guess.
It's what they teach in public school anyway...lol
I dunno...I agreed that Union members are people with the same rights as...well, other people.
What more do you want?
Quite a few things would not exist without people. Do all of those have rights?
The significance you attach to the involvement of people as an argument for the transference of cons utional rights is truly stunning.
Since corporations don't exist without people, they can't have any rights without people. Because, y'know...they don't exist.
"Ragging"? The hallmark of a well-educated mind.So...ragging on corporations, is ragging on the people who chartered them, and/or work in them. Since corporations are people, those people have all the same rights as well....you.
You are simply trying to seperate a Corporation from the people who create and work for it. Easier to make an "it" rather than a "them"... into baddies I guess.
It's what they teach in public school anyway...lol
Clearly you are a top graduate.
Then again, I didn't attend the Limbaugh School of Cons utional Studies.
@SF:Incoherent.
You're blurring the difference between the class and the member of the class. Since the class in this case is a chartered creature of the state, and not, say, of the US Cons ution (unlike the US citizens who are members of that class), the government may limit it as it so chooses, without impinging the individual rights of the member of the class.
Regulating corporations re: elections does not significantly hinder the ability of individuals to combine to lobby or to seek a redress of grievances outside the confines of the corporation itself.
E.g., what is a trade association?
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-21-2010 at 04:26 PM.
Or, governments are made up of people. Thus, governments have Bill of Rights protections.
You don't think limiting what a "corporation" can and cannot do, is not limiting the people in it?
Regulating corporations is regulating people.
"This corp cannot do x."
The people cannot do x...unless they leave the corporation to do it.
Your not regulating some invisible en y...your regulating the people behind the "corporation." Corporations do not do anything without people...so you HAVE to regulate people when regulating a corporation.
Why regulate something that does nothing without people. Your regulating people.
"corporations can't vote"
Corporations don't vote...people do.
"corporations can't run ads"
Corporations don't run ads...the people inside the corporations do.
Of course your regulating people when you regulate corporations.
Are we still having fun??
What is a trade association?
Govts have bill of rights protections...for the PEOPLE living in that govt.
what is so hard to understand here?
As association of traders? lol
What do you want it to be? An association of tradesman?
(SF subs utes sheer repi ion for argumentation, hoping to outlast his critics.)
But bidness is good and bidnesses are made up of people who have rights and since rights are a good thing...then bidnesses have rights. And if you disagree with me you are a commie who went to a public school, which, oddly enough were spread across this nation in no small part to create good little big bidness worshiping lackeys like 'SouthernFried'.
Not to mention that moniker is amusing as the southern tradition of Jeffersonian agrarian conservatism was quite hostile to big bidness.
It's a business lobby. Proof and practice that corporations are not hamstrung by limitations on electoral giving.
Way to backpedal there. The government itself is an individual, for as you have told us all it takes is having people involved to make an organization an individual with rights.
Don't back down, pussy.
It's a good way to kick up more dust.
Ok...that's nice. Good even. No reason to have stupid limitations then, right?
Yeah. Just let them have the whole store. Good idea.
lol...I love you too man.
Our Government is made of people...not one individual. And your point?
Also corporations are considered a citizen in the laws eyes, and SCOTUS has held that precedent, like how spending money is considered a 1st Amendment protected right.
More proof of who really runs the ing country.
Oh, your scared of business and the people within it?
Why didn't you just come out and say it.
It's stupid...but, that's ok. Now I understand where your coming from.
I'm a businessman.
boo
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)