The Supreme Court decision

[gwillen]

For those on my flist, if any, who support the Court's decision in /Citizens United v. FEC/, I would be interested to know your answers to the following questions:

Is a toaster a person?

Is a corporation a person?

Can you explain the difference?

What would it mean for a toaster to have a right to free speech?

What does it mean, precisely, for a corporation to have a right to free speech? This is not the same as the free speech rights enjoyed by any of the people involved as individuals -- this, as ruled by the court, is a separate right, belonging to the corporation as an entity in and of itself, completely independent of the rights of any of the individuals involved.

Can you explain the difference?

ETA: Justice Rehnquist's dissent in /First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti/
makes for excellent reading on the subject.

Comments

[physics-dude.livejournal.com]

I am not seeing what your points have to do with the original discussion, which has to do with corporate entities.

What does the assertion that a group can achieve greater intelligence than separate individuals have to do with whether that group should get additional legal recognition and privilege? What does the demonstrated expertise of people in a business have to do with the legal treatment of activities those people may engage in outside of their business? What do the advantages of a free market have to do with granting of additional legal privilege to a business group, and whether they should be able to apply that privilege outside of running their business? How do your economic arguments apply at all to a not for profit?