Social Question

ETpro's avatar

What questions are raised by the knowledge that corporations are people?

Asked by ETpro (34145 points ) December 9th, 2013

For instance, do they have the right to bear arms? When two corporations whose directors and top executives are all males (or females for that matter) merge, is that same-sex marriage? Should such mergers be prohibited in the 33 states that ban such marriages? How about states that ban same-sex couples from adoption. Does that preclude a corporation from buying a smaller company unless there is an even balance of males and females in management? How even does the balance have to be? When corporate boards slowly transition from all male to all female or vice-versa, are they transsexual corporations?

What other absurdities can you think of that arise thanks to the 5 cons who GOPers put on the Supreme Court?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

23 Answers

whitenoise's avatar

If you think up an idea for a new business venture, you cannot abandon it anymore, once you have had more than three meetings on it; abortion is illegal. You have to bring it to full viable fruition and then render it to another company.

ragingloli's avatar

How do you jail a corporation?
How do you execute one?
Do you jail/execute all the upper management, or all employees?
Or do you put it into the hands of an external administrator that freezes all activities of the corporation, analogous to jail-time, and dissolve the corporation as an analogue to the death penalty?

bossob's avatar

They have the right to be seated and served at the Woolworth’s lunch counter?

I’ll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.

DWW25921's avatar

It’s a silly idea as you’ve already pointed out. What if a company splits, it is like a divorce? Are the smaller companies that the parent companies created treated like children? Do the parent companies get visitation rights to visit their child companies? When parent companies get older do the child companies have to supply some sort of “older company day care” arrangement? We live in an absurd world.

bossob's avatar

Will our choices in the next presidential election be Exxon vs. Bank of America?

ragingloli's avatar

@bossob
that is already the case

DWW25921's avatar

@ragingloli Stick it to the man! Ha! So sadly true…

rojo's avatar

We are already having that problem. We have two cases before the Supreme Court right now about whether or not corporations have religious rights. So the question posed by @ETPro is not absurd.

DWW25921's avatar

@rojo Seriously? Wow… I do beg to differ though, just because it’s valid doesn’t mean it’s not absurd. @ETpro comes up with some pretty good stuff. I just wish absurdity didn’t dictate reality…

SquirrelEStuff's avatar

Are we all ’‘artificial persons’’ in the eye of the government?

“This site talks about how the government has created a simulated construct of “you” that you have been made to believe is you, in order to be held accountable to laws, the tax code, etc. It also discusses that the government has a stipulation for “natural persons” who wish to represent themselves within the system. You effectivey get to choose whether the artificial construct is you, or the natural you is you, when representing yourself. The artificial “you” is a legal construct and it gives the government ownership and entitlement to you, your property, money, etc. The natural you is the God-given one that is subject to the Creator and has more to do with human-born rights and actions.

The website is a fascinating read and will give you a different perspective on your place in the polity. It also has wide implications for what the government can do to you based on this ownership, and that you are a defacto slave for subscribing to their artificial version of you.”

DWW25921's avatar

@SquirrelEStuff That’s good/scarey stuff. I kind of wish I hadn’t read that. It would seem this absurdity has been labeled, defined and organized into tight little boxes!

Tropical_Willie's avatar

The corporation can’t get a driver’s license or a marriage license or a dog license.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@ragingloli Nah. It’s more like Exxon/Bank of America vs Exxon/Bank of America. No matter what Exxon/Bank of America wins.

bossob's avatar

Corporations use ‘stand your ground’ gun laws to defend themselves from unions.

(I realize corporations have used firearms against labor activists in the past, but ‘stand your ground’ gives them new legal opportunities.)

@ragingloli Come to think of it, you’re right.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Who was it who stated last year that “I will consider corporations to be people as soon as Texas executes one”?

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

@bossob “Will our choices in the next presidential election be Exxon vs. Bank of America?”

That is so not a metaphor anymore that it’s not even funny.

ETpro's avatar

@whitenoise How do you give birth to a corporation by c-section? I mean, it it;s a really big corporation, natural childbirth isn’t just painful, it’s not an option. It would result in the death of the mother (of course the Supreme Corporatists of the The United States could care less about the mother’s death, but they care intensely if that threatens the viability of their newborn Corporation, and the mother dying is childbirth often means the child will die as well.

@ragingloli I am pretty sure that the GOPer Cons on the court would find that you execute all the workers and release management to go do it all over again.

@bossob Woolworths was murdered in 1997, so this question is not well formed.

I’ve heard that reference ti Texas executing a corporation. They will. It’s just that it will be a Non-profit and will be doing enormous good for suffering Texans, something that is the penultimate crime in the eyes of the corporatist COPers on the Supreme Court.

@DWW25921 Exactly what I was getting at. Thanks.

@rojo That’s what led me to ask. Just how far does COPer idiocy for person-hood go?

@DWW25921 Thanks. But absurdity never dictates reality. It just does its utmost to obscure reality for a time, and it always loses in the long run.

@SquirrelEStuff Sorry, but I see no more evidence humans were created by God than that the were created by governments (which they were not). I have no interest in casting off one oppressor only to breathlessly embrace another.

@Tropical_Willie Not yet. There is more Constitutional work for the 5 Cons making up the Supreme Corporatists to do undo.

@Darth_Algar You’ve got my drift. :-)

@bossob How true. As it’s applied in GOPer heartland (Florida, Texas), it appears firing a warning shot to defend your life is not standing your ground, but as long as you kill the person you are firing at, you can shoot them in the back. Of course, it helps a great deal to be white and kill somebody who isn’t.

@stanleybmanly Don’t hold your breath.

@Espiritus_Corvus Sadly true.

rojo's avatar

So a chimp, a creature that has, what, 98% of the same dna as we do, cannot be a person Link but a completely artificial construct of a human imagination whose sole purpose is the glorification of yet another artificial construct, money, can be? What the hell is wrong with this picture?

ETpro's avatar

@rojo What’s wrong with the picture? GOPers painted it.

ETpro's avatar

Here’s one for you. The current case before the Supremes is whether Hobby Lobby, a company whose management are all Christians, has the right to the free exerciser of their religious freedom as a corporate person, and so can refuse to comply with the affordable care act’s requirement to provide health insurance that covers female reproductive care. If the 5 GOPers say yes, and corporations can go to church and worship as they see fit, what heaven do corporations go to? Why didn’t God think to include corporations in the Bible?

Darth_Algar's avatar

And if the SCOTUS rules in favor of Hobby Lobby could, say, a corporation ran by Islamic fundamentalists then claim religious freedom and require their female employees to wear a burqa?

ragingloli's avatar

and somewhere down the line, they will give corporations voting rights, and one corporate vote will be worth as much normal votes as they have employees, and then the employees will be banned from voting themselves, because the corporation already voted for them, or as the gop lawmakers will call it, “voted through the corporation”

ETpro's avatar

@ragingloli If they aren’t killed first.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther