Proof the SCOTUS decided against the founders intent

[Gunny]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

Take your lithium, huh?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

 

[Chris]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

Hey stupid, SCOTUS concluded that corporations were in fact people.

The Opus Dei Catholics on the Supreme Court concluded that their corporate masters were losing their grip on power.

The Empire Strikes Back.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

According to Truthmatters, "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech..."

Means that if it's a corporation buying a political ad, Congress can in fact pass laws limiting Free Speech-- except for the NY Times Corp, and except for Indians owning the NY Times Corp, which would be illegal under Trurhmatters limited understanding of the Constitution because he said previously the founders did not want Indians owning newspapers.

Your point made no sense when you posted it in the other thread and now that you gave it its own thread it makes even less sense. What do corporations have to do with "Congress shall make no law"? What?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Hey stupid, SCOTUS concluded that corporations were in fact people.

Corporations cannot vote. Corporations are not people.

The SCOTUS relied on precedent that said Corps had some of the rights of people.

The SCOTUS never said corporations are people.

 

[WillowTree]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

so all the corporations have to do is install a printing press then you will shut the fuck up??

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

Interesting take on things. Worthy of consideration and debate.

Too bad the lunatics here denounce it out of hand without giving it serious thought.

small minds made smaller by wallowing in a little pond called USMB

 

[WillowTree]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

Interesting take on things. Worthy of consideration and debate.

Too bad the lunatics here denounce it out of hand without giving it serious thought.

small minds made smaller by wallowing in a little pond called USMB

and just neverthefuckmindthatthesupremecourtwhoisqualifiedtoconsideranddebatehasalreadymadeadecision.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Idiot Alert!

...shut the fuck up??

Idiot Alert!

 

[Big Fitz]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

Oh NOW you want original intent? 80 years of judicial activism and twisted precedents and when one doesn't go your way you freak out?

yeesh! What crap.

 

[Big Fitz]

HAH! You just found my new 'stupid' pic and scooped me. DOH!

 

[Yurt]

Idiot Alert!


Idiot Alert!

thank you for announcing your presence

 

[Avatar4321]

"Congress shall make no law" seems pretty dang clear to me. They didnt write "Congress shall make no law. . . except. . . "

 

[Liability]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

"OR."

Somebody will have to get "truthdoesn'tmattertoheratall" a remedial course in English so that she can begin to grasp the meaning of "disjunctive."

 

[☭proletarian☭]

So since you don't think corporations are people, then you must agree that we shouldn't be able to sue a corporation either right?

Suing the company is effectively suing the people who comprise it.

Kinda like talking about 'the GOP' is talking about the people who comprise the body which they call the GOP.

Really.. kind of like advertising done by the company is done by the people who comprise it? Yeah.. That's what I thought.

Were you trying to make a point?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is all anyone needs to realise they did not intend corporations to have special rights to have their right to speech defended.

The founders singled out ONE industry for obvious reasons.

They could have said all corporations in all fields if that was the intenet.

They did not.

they mentioned ONLY one industry.

Freedom of the press was the only exception to Human Beings they intended.

There was no 'the press' back then. The freedom of the press referred to the right of all people to print what they wished. You know, pamphlets and stuff.

Another example of the right just making chit up.

Pages from America's Past

HOLY SHIT!! I'VE BEEN CALLED A RIGHT WINGER!!


*prepares for the apocalypse*

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Hey stupid, SCOTUS concluded that corporations were in fact people.

Corporations cannot vote. Corporations are not people.

The SCOTUS relied on precedent that said Corps had some of the rights of people.

The SCOTUS never said corporations are people.

Don't confuse Lonestar with real logic.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Hey stupid, SCOTUS concluded that corporations were in fact people.

Corporations cannot vote. Corporations are not people.

The SCOTUS relied on precedent that said Corps had some of the rights of people.

The SCOTUS never said corporations are people.

Bottom line is corporations are entitled to free speech.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So, obviously by TruthMatters Bizzaroland logic, the 10 Commandments would NOT apply to corporations

 

[Dr Gregg]

If that was their intention they would of made it clear, but corporations weren't rampant and gigantic back then.