Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Havoc
"Corporations should be outlawed" ?

The FFs NEVER said one damned word about corporations, nor that they should be outlawed!

No, a corp[oration isn't a person, but they are owned and run by people. According to you, we need to all stand up for our neighbors' RIGHTS, so WHY do you want to take away the RIGHTS of those who own and run corporations? Class warfare is NOT a Conservative value and none of the FFs would agree with you on this subject.

429 posted on 01/02/2006 9:59:01 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 423 | View Replies ]


To: nopardons
According to you me, we need to all stand up for our neighbors' RIGHTS
431 posted on 01/02/2006 10:00:54 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies ]

To: Havoc
so WHY do you want to take away the RIGHTS of those who own and run corporations?

Guess you hit a "free trader" nerve. You can't have "civil governance" in the global scheme of things without corporations to fill the "civil" part.
434 posted on 01/02/2006 10:03:18 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies ]

To: nopardons; Havoc; hedgetrimmer
No, a corp[oration isn't a person, but they are owned and run by people.

Maybe not in your eyes but the law says differently:

In 1886, . . . in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a private corporation is a person and entitled to the legal rights and protections the Constitutions affords to any person. Because the Constitution makes no mention of corporations, it is a fairly clear case of the Court's taking it upon itself to rewrite the Constitution.

Far more remarkable, however, is that the doctrine of corporate personhood, which subsequently became a cornerstone of corporate law, was introduced into this 1886 decision without argument. According to the official case record, Supreme Court Justice Morrison Remick Waite simply pronounced before the beginning of arguement in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company that:

The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of opinion that it does.

From here

I guess you should try reading a little more history and stop telling others they are stupid.

508 posted on 01/03/2006 5:09:05 AM PST by raybbr (ANWR is a barren, frozen wasteland - like the mind of a democrat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson