Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: if corporations have unlimitted free SPEECH rights

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 3, 2012, 5:18 p.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

does that mean that the president of a for-profit corporation should have the right to hold a meeting to advocate for a candidate?


does that mean that the pastor of a non-profit (501c3) congregation should have the right to hold a meeting to advocate for a candidate?


is the only real way to stop this - to end corporate personhood? note- I'm not raising the MONEY issue here at all

25 Comments

25 Comments


Read the Rules

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Slavery is the legal fiction that a person is property. Corporate personhood is the legal fiction that property is a person.

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

vast amount of info on that site & great videos

[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Good point - that crazy thing about "corporation personhood" has devalued human beings.

Corporations have overstepped their rightfull place, and maybe the only way to stop it is to dismantle them all.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23964) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Not too big to fail - Too Damn Big To Leave Alone. Break em up.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Hey THATS a good slogan - can I post it in the SLOGAN thread?

http://occupywallst.org/forum/slogan-for-ows/

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23964) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Please - and tweet it. I will when I see the post - and I hope everyone who supports OWS and all of the Occupy movements will do the same.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

I do not advocate that ( it would be impossible )
I advocate eliminating personhood ( which 80% of Americans agree with )

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Well yes, you are being more reasonable than I... but corporations enjoy the benefits of personhood, and because they have so much power and influence they might be able to fight off any attempts at eliminating corporate personhood... then what?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

we must elect representatives that will pass an amendment -
there are some amendments in congress TODAY

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

I read the link, its a good start at least. I don't think THIS congress will reverse any of those three decisions [super-pacs, money is speech, corporations are people].

Government should REPRESENT the people instead of GOVERNING the people, but the Elites don't see it that way - they have nothing but scorn for average people, they call us "the little people" {remember the BP executive from Sweden who let that cat out of the bag during the Gulf Spill crisis?}.

And because the Dems and Reps are both made up of Elites, they are not about to start listening to the majority.

America needs a third party or some kind of third choice

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23964) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

The perfect 3rd choice would be - You Are Out Of Office and the Office will remain vacant until The People Have chosen a replacement - your votes to this point in time are null and void - except where-in the people may have agreed - this to be determined by poll of those who you were supposed to represent.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Ya, good one - get 'em out, close the doors until they promise to REPRESENT the voters but anything with that many words is more like a philosophy than a slogan, LOL.

See the Slogan thread for the summary {so far - keep adding them!!} link> http://occupywallst.org/forum/slogan-for-ows/

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23964) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I saw - I like - we need to have such - to get people involved - even if it is at 1st just by way of popular slogan.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

ya its just a teaser to get the conversation going, but if it works...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23964) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Popular slogans also stay in circulation. So they do stay conversation starters.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

A person who owns a company should be legally allowed to hold a meeting to back a political candidate. Although I would say its really stupid, given the inabilty of our population to think for themselves and act rationally.

Im not sure how the nonprofit status fits into this model.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

I am trying to address a DIFFERENT dimension of this issue.
clearly the money is speech is far more important
but if we ONLY do that, will it not leave the pastors able to use their church "corporate free speech rights" as a tax exempt organization to back candidates ( which IS in violation of 501c3 IRS laws )

again - NOT relating to spending money

check out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/pastors-conservative-groups-challenge-irs-pulpit-free-sunday_n_1901080.html

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We MUST end corp personhood! As well as the concept that money = speech.

End corp personhood.!

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Ending corporate personhood won't stop the corruption. They will just do it individually like Sheldon Adelson already does.

One solution would be to limit money spent or donated per candidate per election to $200 or less by every person or entity except the candidates campaign committee.

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1643) from Cornelius, OR 2 years ago

Mormons did in CA over same sex marriage and now in this election.

Religion and Private Sector should be fire-walled from elections.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 2 years ago

The corporations aren't buying elections; they're buying favorable legislation and they already have a very effective vehicle for this. My feeling is that it will not impact this year's election one way or the other.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

look for the super-pac ads

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 2 years ago

I'm watching... we will see. One thing this has done, I would assume, is generate new wealth for the networks in ramping up air time.

At the moment I'm really aggravated here with one of the local Dems who's running for Congress; it seems he has lassoed my Youtube - his ads are on every video and each requires that I wait three seconds to listen repeatedly to the same lame msg.

[Removed]