corporate vs. state, TD's education

Justin justin-cypherpunks at soze.net
Thu Mar 25 15:46:29 PST 2004


Harmon Seaver (2004-03-25 23:06Z) wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 05:27:14PM -0500, mfidelman at ntcorp.com wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Harmon Seaver wrote:
> > 
> > >    Nonsense -- corporations are not humans, they have zero rights.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, there are a whole slew of Supreme Court decisions that say 
> > otherwise - mostly applying the 14th amendment (you know, freeing the 
> > slaves) to grant free speech and other constitutional protections to 
> > corporations.
> 
>    Correct, that is unfortunate -- and it certainly is additional evidence (as
> if anyone needed more) that the Supremes are just another criminal gang. 

Why should it be impermissible for corporations to be "persons" under
the law when parents can be "persons" on behalf of their minor children?

In both situations, one or more people are "persons" only to represent
others.  Does a parent have any more right to act on behalf of others
than a company does?

-- 
That woman deserves her revenge... and... we deserve to die.
 -- Budd, "Kill Bill"





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list