Comments on: The People’s Rights Amendment

By: Rogue Elephant

Rogue Elephant — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 20:58:35 +0000

The PRA is nothing less than a totalitarian power grab that (by robbing all “corporate entities” of all Constitutional rights) would grant government the power to seize all corporate assets – total economic control (no hyperbole required).

http://roguethinks.com/2012/04/28/war-on-speech-goes-totalitarian/

By: Michael PS

Michael PS — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:10:18 +0000

Raises interesting questions on the criminal liability of corporations.

If a corporation obstructs a highway, one can always point to some individual and indict him (or them) responsible. But, what if a corporation fails to repair a highway that it is bound to repair, by reason of tenure? It is the corporation, not the officers or members who are infeft, so, if the corporation is not liable, then no one is. Indeed, if the corporation is not a person, how can it be infeft?

This is precisely the argument that the National Assembly used to declare church property essentially ownerless and the “goods of the nation.”

By: Thomas A. Szyszkiewicz

Thomas A. Szyszkiewicz — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:11:15 +0000

What I don’t get is why no one is raising the issue about the right of assembly. Granted, a corporation is not a group of people gathering in a public square, but it is people peaceably assembling together in a legal, rather than a physical, group. And the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances comes immediately after the right of assembly, which indicates that the two were probably linked in the Founders’ minds. But of the right of a group of people to petition would be completely abrogated by this proposed amendment. As Mike Melendez said, the third part completely contradicts the thrust of the intent and it does so because it restricts these inalienable rights.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:09:12 +0000

Michael Pederson: “Citizens United is an abomination invented by a bought and paid for supreme court to ensure the end of an Obama nation.”

So, you agree with this, then?: “During the original oral argument, then-Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart (representing the FEC) argued that under Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the government would have the power to ban books if those books contained even one sentence expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate and were published or distributed by a corporation or union.”

By: Francis J. Beckwith

Francis J. Beckwith — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:35:40 +0000

DukeFan, since no corporate entities are legal persons, then the government is not a legal person either. This means it cannot act intelligently, enforce justice, or even remedy wrongs, since those are only acts that persons can actualize. This means that when the government interred Japanese-Americans during the Second World War, the one who committed the wrong owed nothing to these ill-treated citizens, since there is no legal person that acted who is responsible for this.

As Professor Knippenberg points it, this is complicated stuff the resolution of which requires an element of intellectual virtue. The only thing that generates more light than heat.

By: Michael Pedersen

Michael Pedersen — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:11:56 +0000

Can we have a corporate people marry a personhood spermazoa people if they both claim to be born again? Can we execute them both in Texas? If the church corporate people can give unlimited funds to political causes can we finally take away their tax status? Must the corporate people be provided birth control? Citizens United is an abomination invented by a bought and paid for supreme court to ensure the end of an Obama nation.

By: Mike Melendez

Mike Melendez — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:53:35 +0000

DukeFan writes: “Corporates is a profit machine, it does not exist to represent or to help people.”

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

All NGOs are corporations. All non-profits are corporations. All churches are corporations at various levels. All hospitals are corporations. All soup kitchens are corporations. The Red Cross is a corporation. The United Way is a corporation. All labor unions are corporations. Need I go on?

Yes, some are there for the sake of profit. But none speak for themselves. Only people speak for them. So how can one take away a corporation’s freedom of speech without taking it away from some human being? Of course your employer doesn’t represent you as an employee. But neither do you get a stockholder’s vote when you are hired. Buy stock and you get a vote in what the profit corporation has to say.

As to the love of money being the root of all evil, I doubt there will be much disagreement here. But note, “the love” of money, better known as greed or avarice, is the problem not money itself. Now, just how do you outlaw greed?

By: Heraclitus

Heraclitus — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:45:33 +0000

It would be well to remember that universities are corporations and legislatures are corporate bodies. In other words, corporations are not just “evil” business entities, but are entities that exist for all sorts of purposes. It is also interesting to note that Islamic law explicitly does not recognize the notion of a corporate person. This was not a problem for Islamic civilization as long as economic, intellectual and political activities were small-scale and, for the most part, of a personal nature. But it became a huge handicap as these societies began to develop. That is why, it should be noted, that the Islamic world – and the non-Western world in general – never developed the university, in the real and fundamentally important sense of a self-governing, stable, corporate body of scholars. Those who would wish to eliminate the notion of corporate personhood would do well to contemplate its results in the Islamic world before jumping on board this bandwagon. It is a very disturbing development and one that displays incredible historical ignorance and myopia

By: Heraclitus

Heraclitus — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:43:11 +0000

It would be well to remember that universities are corporations and legislatures are corporate bodies. In other words, corporations are not just “evil” business entities, but are entities that exist for all sorts of purposes. It is also interesting to note that Islamic law explicitly does not recognize the notion of a corporate person. This was not a problem for Islamic civilization as long as economic, intellectual and political activities were small-scale for the most part of a personal nature. But it became a huge handicap as these societies began to develop. That is why, it should be noted, that the Islamic world – and the non-Western world – never developed the university, in the real sense as a self-governing, stable, corporate body of scholars. Those who would wish to eliminate the notion of corporate personhood would do well to contemplate its results in the Islamic world before jumping on board this bandwagon. It is a very disturbing development and one that displays incredible historical ignorance and myopia.

By: DukeFan

DukeFan — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 22:20:20 +0000

I think that using “complicated reasoning and language” to defend something so obviously clear to regular people is kind of dishonest and arrogant. For normal people (commoners) like us, here is what we perceive about Citizens United:

- Corporates are people – This is an utterly empty and false statement. I agree that Corporates consist of real people – but the Corporates are not representative of people working for them. Corporates is a profit machine, it does not exist to represent or to help people. I work for an actual corporate but I have no desire for this corporate to represent my voice in any public discussion.

- The rise of soft and hidden money in the Super PACs. With this ruling, every individual can contribute an unlimited amount of money. According to some study, less than 1% of individual account for more than 50% of all campain contribution. These rich indivduals can then excert a tremendous amount of influence on governental policy compare to the rest of us. Also, it is shown that corporates that contribute the most are the most to benefit from government policy.

I always remember the statement from a priest during a Sunday homily at my church: “The root of all evil is the love of money”; and Jesus has declared himself that his main ennemy is “money” – as the word “Mammon” is translated into many languages, including Vietnamese.I can easily see that Coporates and Super PACs are ennemy of Jesus if he is alive today…