[at-l] OT - Freedom of Speech was Snowshoeing VS Hiking

[David Addleton]

Clyde, the small, closely held corporation is a different animal
altogether from the trans-national behemoth that answers to no nation
anywhere on the globe. Problem is our law don't distinguish between
the mom & pop landscaping business and the trans-national giants.

Remember this: while the bill of rights constrains our democratically
elected government to protect individual liberties, corporations
(inc's, llc's, ltd's, etc, etc, etc) suffer under no such restraints:
you and I and corporations have the right, protected by our laws, to
prohibit you from practicing your religion, reading what you want,
viewing what you want, publishing what you want, talking about what
you wish to talk about, bearing arms, etc; we have the right,
protected by our laws, to treat some individuals differently than
other individuals for any reason, and for prohibited reasons (race,
gender, national origin, religion, color, veteran's status,
disability, etc., if we can articulate a nondiscriminatory rationale
for the disparate treatment); we have the right to promulgate laws and
regulations governing your behavior and your thoughts and to hold you
accountable, without due process, and without counsel, for any reason.
While all this is true also for a natural, real person, there's one
important difference: a corporation cannot be held accountable for
violating a criminal law because there is no "person" whose liberty or
life may be diminished or taken to pay for such violations. Thus,
while corporations and individuals both have a right to organize
police and military to carry out their intentions, only an individual
can face a tribunal for treason, terrorism, or murder. Among
individuals, the only ones I know who organize police and military
forces are the so-called illegal drug king-pens; corporate "security"
forces, however, continue to grow in popularity. Thus, Amtrack, the
Federal Reserve, and private university police forces, for example,
are not constrained by the Bill of Rights. (This is also why our own
government can hire Blackwater mercenaries to avoid constitutional
constraints.)

I have not yet read the recent SCOTUS opinion. Notwithstanding, I see
NO REASON why a "virtual, de jure" person such a corporation, which
positive, statutory law created, cannot have its activities
constitutionally limited and circumscribed by the positive, statutory
law that created them, nor why they should receive **any** protections
under the Bill of Rights, except those expressly, by the creating law,
afforded to them. And, I see good policy reasons for limiting the
activities of corporate organizations.



On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 6:58 PM,  <rcli4 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Evil Corporations is really funny.  I'm guessing that 65 percent of folks
> work for corporations.  Corporations are pieces of paper.  I owned a corp
> for 24 and a half years. I contributed to candidates and the republican
> party every one of those years.  I also donated more to the boys and girls
> club then most of the folks reading this made in those 24 years.  Frank, if
> your gonna talk shit, try to do it with a narrower brush.
>
> Clyde
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: nightwalker at
> To: Jim Bullard , bror8588 at aol.com
> Cc: at-l at mailman.backcountry.net
> Sent: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:25:29 +0000 (UTC)
> Subject: Re: [at-l] OT - Freedom of Speech was Snowshoeing VS Hiking
>
> Jim, before they're through, the Roberts court will do more harm to the
> country than has been thought of yet. And that's not politics. I'm talking
> about things like removing protected status for lots of places we hold near
> and dear.
>
>
>
> I could see a lawsuit being brought that gets to the USSOC that totally
> takes the teeth out of the National Scenic Trails Act. Up to and including
> the forced return of lands siezed by eminent domain acquisitions. All it
> will take is the right plaintiff with enough money, coming up through the
> correct Federal court district. It could happen. I really hope not, though.
>
>
>
> As I said, this isn't about politics. And for future reference to whoever
> may not know the difference: I AM NOT A LIBERAL!!! I just believe that
> people should be put before corporations. Oh well.
>
>
>
> Hug a tree for Thomas Jefferson.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Jim Bullard
>
> Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 5:54 PM
>
> To:
>
> Cc: ;
>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] OT - Freedom of Speech was Snowshoeing VS Hiking
>
>
>
> IMO The Bill of Rights was intended to protect the freedoms of individuals.
> Corporations are not individuals and money is not speech. Yeah, I know they
> are virtual persons for liability purposes but that shouldn't extend to
> everything else. The next thing you know they'll be granting them the vote.
> Same goes for unions as far as I'm concerned.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 4:28 PM, wrote:
>
> Are you referring to the Unions?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: nightwalker.at at gmail.com
>
> To: giniajim ; Felix J
>
> Cc: at-l
>
> Sent: Sat, Jan 23, 2010 2:11 pm
>
> Subject: Re: [at-l] Snowshoeing VS Hikng
>
>
>
> You mean the same guys that, only last week, gave corporations the right to
> buy
>
> all future elections? Those guys? Right...
>
>
>
> Jim Bullard
>
> http://jims-ramblings.blogspot.com/
>
> http://members.photoportfolios.net/Jim_Bullard
>
> http://www.photoshelter.com/c/jim_bullard
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> at-l mailing list
>
> at-l at backcountry.net
>
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> at-l mailing list
> at-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>
>