So, today on Twitter, a couple guys claiming to be "Independent Constitutionalists" @'d me and wanted me to follow them. I looked at the profile and I see that "Mo" is a Christian Tea Party Gun Enthusiast and that "Ron" is a Conservative Pro-Life Personhood supporter.
First off, you can't be "Independent" if your whole platform lines up with the Republican Tea Party.
So, I tweet back that Theocracy and Personhood, both embryonic and corporate, is anti-constitutional. I'm thinking they would just unfollow, but oh, no... they tried to convince me...
So, "Mo" says
"Personhood of the unborn's 1st a scientific fact. From that fact moral conclusions can be drawn, Agreed?"
I reply with, "Personhood of the unborn is religious based myth, so no, not agreed."
People are Born, unborn are unpeople. (Yes, it is a bit more complicated than that, but I like the line.)
Then "Ron" chimes in supporting corporate personhood, claiming that those who oppose it are against freedom of association and that it doesn't mean what ignorant people think it means. He claims that Corporate Personhood is what enables corporations to enter into contracts.
I point out to "Ron" that the Founding Fathers largely were against 'corporate personhood' and that for centuries Contract Law has kept them able to form contracts and be held responsible for those contracts.
On Personhood... if 90% of all arguments in favor of a position require citing religious texts, then it is religiously based and should not be part of our government. Individuals are more than welcome to continue to hold the belief - they are just very unwelcome to force others to adhere to it by force of Federal or State Law.
On Corporate Personhood... You can easily look up what our founders thought about corporations. A good place to start is the Boston Tea Party - against the East India Tea Company and their tax breaks.
Incorporation provided a lot of benefits to a company.
When our Nation was founded, there were laws set up to control and regulate corporations. Corporations were of limited time and required to reapply and uphold basic standards of behavior 'for the common good.' Over the years - with founders and leaders warning against it - corporations bought our lawmakers and had them go crazy with deregulation. Now, the corporations bought the Supreme Court and had them open the door so they can outright buy our elections. Democracy is imperiled and I am not sure how we can recover our government By the People, for the People.
Especially when you have twits like Mo and Ron applauding their corporate masters assuming the mantle of control - all for assurances that their religion will be the basis for laws from now on.
First off, you can't be "Independent" if your whole platform lines up with the Republican Tea Party.
So, I tweet back that Theocracy and Personhood, both embryonic and corporate, is anti-constitutional. I'm thinking they would just unfollow, but oh, no... they tried to convince me...
So, "Mo" says
"Personhood of the unborn's 1st a scientific fact. From that fact moral conclusions can be drawn, Agreed?"
I reply with, "Personhood of the unborn is religious based myth, so no, not agreed."
People are Born, unborn are unpeople. (Yes, it is a bit more complicated than that, but I like the line.)
Then "Ron" chimes in supporting corporate personhood, claiming that those who oppose it are against freedom of association and that it doesn't mean what ignorant people think it means. He claims that Corporate Personhood is what enables corporations to enter into contracts.
I point out to "Ron" that the Founding Fathers largely were against 'corporate personhood' and that for centuries Contract Law has kept them able to form contracts and be held responsible for those contracts.
On Personhood... if 90% of all arguments in favor of a position require citing religious texts, then it is religiously based and should not be part of our government. Individuals are more than welcome to continue to hold the belief - they are just very unwelcome to force others to adhere to it by force of Federal or State Law.
On Corporate Personhood... You can easily look up what our founders thought about corporations. A good place to start is the Boston Tea Party - against the East India Tea Company and their tax breaks.
Incorporation provided a lot of benefits to a company.
All of those benefits must be balanced by limitations - meaning they don't have all the rights of People. Corporations are immortal, they can't be imprisoned, the owners and employees are not liable for corporate debt and largely not for corporate misdeeds.
- Limited Liability (personal and business assets separated)
- Tax Breaks
- Immortality
- Fluid ownership
- Easier Fundraising (stocks, bank loans, etc)
When our Nation was founded, there were laws set up to control and regulate corporations. Corporations were of limited time and required to reapply and uphold basic standards of behavior 'for the common good.' Over the years - with founders and leaders warning against it - corporations bought our lawmakers and had them go crazy with deregulation. Now, the corporations bought the Supreme Court and had them open the door so they can outright buy our elections. Democracy is imperiled and I am not sure how we can recover our government By the People, for the People.
Especially when you have twits like Mo and Ron applauding their corporate masters assuming the mantle of control - all for assurances that their religion will be the basis for laws from now on.
Thank you for writing this: "On Personhood... if 90% of all arguments in favor of a position require citing religious texts, then it is religiously based and should not be part of our government. Individuals are more than welcome to continue to hold the belief - they are just very unwelcome to force others to adhere to it by force of Federal or State Law." I hope you don't mind me quoting you when I discuss this with my conservative GIRL friends. They are all big Personhood supporters, which is why we don't hang out very often.
ReplyDeleteBy all means, Quote away! :) Thank you! Use the words as your own, even!
ReplyDeleteI just want more people to get and understand the point.