• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Multinational Corporations Have Constitutional Rights?

Do Multinational Corporations Have Constitutional Rights?

  • Yes, the same as individuals

  • No, not at all, they aren't people.


Results are only viewable after voting.

MrNiceGuy

Symbiotic Pnemonic
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2022
Messages
7,515
Reaction score
3,291
Location
The Twilight Zone
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
So, does a corporation have freedom of speech and religion?

If the government takes action to limit corporate speech, as it did in the Citizens United case, should corporations have the right to speak on political issues without suffering punishment or repercussions from the government?
 

jonny5

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
25,435
Reaction score
4,225
Location
Republic of Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So, does a corporation have freedom of speech and religion?

If the government takes action to limit corporate speech, as it did in the Citizens United case, should corporations have the right to speak on political issues without suffering punishment or repercussions from the government?

Of course, and they do. The question is more, should govt be interfering with citizens activities, beyond protecting life and liberty. What life or liberty interest is the govt serving in preventing me from or producing a political video on youtube?

Does the govt have the power to abridge speech?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
89,923
Reaction score
53,628
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So, does a corporation have freedom of speech and religion?

If the government takes action to limit corporate speech, as it did in the Citizens United case, should corporations have the right to speak on political issues without suffering punishment or repercussions from the government?

Other. They obviously do not have all the rights of individuals (what the only affirmative poll option offers), but they should (and do) have free speech rights (as the post above clarifies?). Corporations (business entities?) are taxed, regulated and can be sued so they should have at least some limited means of representation (letting their political views be known).
 
Last edited:

bongsaway

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
38,388
Reaction score
25,370
Location
Flori-duh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
So, does a corporation have freedom of speech and religion?

If the government takes action to limit corporate speech, as it did in the Citizens United case, should corporations have the right to speak on political issues without suffering punishment or repercussions from the government?
You know what corporations who are people if I remember Mitt correctly don't have. Guess what corporations don't get, locked up when they commit a crime. If corporations are indeed people and can say and do whatever with their money again I ask, why does nobody from the corporation go to prison?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
89,923
Reaction score
53,628
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You know what corporations who are people if I remember Mitt correctly don't have. Guess what corporations don't get, locked up when they commit a crime. If corporations are indeed people and can say and do whatever with their money again I ask, why does nobody from the corporation go to prison?

For doing what?

Who would you send to prison for the following:

 

Vadinho

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
5,768
Reaction score
2,931
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Corporations are legal entities created by the state for the benefit of commerce. They are bound by our laws just as any other legal entity. Do they have all the rights associated with individuals? I would argue that where it applies yes, where it doesn't no. Corporations cannot marry people can they? As for free speech, they should be bound by the limits all of us have in terms of speech. I am unsure why this is in question here. Does this have to do with Twitter?
 

Gatsby

Neoliberal Globalist Shill
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Messages
4,802
Reaction score
4,573
Location
Cambridge, MA / Miami, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So, does a corporation have freedom of speech and religion?
Yes, but not because of the Constitution. They have those freedoms because we have chosen to extend them those rights, by statute. And generally I would say that it's appropriate that we do so.
If the government takes action to limit corporate speech, as it did in the Citizens United case, should corporations have the right to speak on political issues without suffering punishment or repercussions from the government?
Yes, corporations should be able to speak on political issues without punishment from the government. I'm not a fan of Citizens United though, which equates dumping money into political ads with free speech. That seems very inappropriate to me. But I have no problem with a corporation issuing a press release saying "We as a company endorse Congressman Smith for governor."
 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
52,421
Reaction score
37,032
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
So, does a corporation have freedom of speech and religion?

If the government takes action to limit corporate speech, as it did in the Citizens United case, should corporations have the right to speak on political issues without suffering punishment or repercussions from the government?

Righties are in no position to be whining about the rights that corporations are given.
 

MrNiceGuy

Symbiotic Pnemonic
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2022
Messages
7,515
Reaction score
3,291
Location
The Twilight Zone
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Righties are in no position to be whining about the rights that corporations are given.
That's a logical fallacy. Whether "righties" or "lefties" have a "position" (moral?) to "whine" doesn't have any relevance to the question. The answer doesn't depend on the quality of the person answering it.

What's your position? Should they, or shouldn't they? And why/why not?
 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
52,421
Reaction score
37,032
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
That's a logical fallacy. Whether "righties" or "lefties" have a "position" (moral?) to "whine" doesn't have any relevance to the question. The answer doesn't depend on the quality of the person answering it.

What's your position? Should they, or shouldn't they? And why/why not?

So if a Communist--a literal Communist, not just someone to the left of Attila the Hun--starts a discussion about the merits of private property, you don't think they have suspicious motives?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
89,923
Reaction score
53,628
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So if a Communist--a literal Communist, not just someone to the left of Attila the Hun--starts a discussion about the merits of private property, you don't think they have suspicious motives?

Protecting speech from government suppression was never about protecting popular speech.
 

Gatsby

Neoliberal Globalist Shill
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Messages
4,802
Reaction score
4,573
Location
Cambridge, MA / Miami, FL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So if a Communist--a literal Communist, not just someone to the left of Attila the Hun--starts a discussion about the merits of private property, you don't think they have suspicious motives?
A person's motives are totally irrelevant to the question of what legal rights they should or shouldn't have.
 

MrNiceGuy

Symbiotic Pnemonic
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2022
Messages
7,515
Reaction score
3,291
Location
The Twilight Zone
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Not sure, I think you can go to prison for fraud or embezzlement but only if prosecuted. Lets face it, white collar crime always gets treated leniently compared to some black kid selling a dime bag.
White kids sell plenty of dime bags, and black people commit plenty of white collar crimes.
 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
52,421
Reaction score
37,032
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Yes, I did. One’s (non-criminal) “motivation” for speaking does not alter their right to speak.

No, you didn't. Read the question again until you get it.
 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
52,421
Reaction score
37,032
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
A person's motives are totally irrelevant to the question of what legal rights they should or shouldn't have.

Yes, and that had nothing to do with my question. :)
 

MrNiceGuy

Symbiotic Pnemonic
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2022
Messages
7,515
Reaction score
3,291
Location
The Twilight Zone
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
So if a Communist--a literal Communist, not just someone to the left of Attila the Hun--starts a discussion about the merits of private property, you don't think they have suspicious motives?
I'll answer that --

Maybe.

I don't know what their "motives" are. Some literal communists may have benevolent motives, and they may think that private property is theft (and immoral) and that it would be a benefit to society for there to be no such thing as private property. Despite a benevolent motive, their ideology, in many other people's opinions, is destructive and an affront to human dignity. Other communists may well have motives to oppress and seize power, or plenty of other motives.

And a follow-up, the motives, suspicious or otherwise, is wholly irrelevant to the question. If you are participating in this discussion, and posing questions to me about it -would you be kind enough to address the OP?

So far you have said "righties" are in no position to whine, and you've asked me if communists have suspicious motives for talking about the merits of private property (and I answered it). Your turn, please.
 

antiquity

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,369
Reaction score
1,102
Location
Northwest Peninsula
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Coprporations may not be individual people but they do have rights. What makes anyone think differently.
 

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
52,421
Reaction score
37,032
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I'll answer that --

Maybe.

I don't know what their "motives" are. Some literal communists may have benevolent motives, and they may think that private property is theft (and immoral) and that it would be a benefit to society for there to be no such thing as private property. Despite a benevolent motive, their ideology, in many other people's opinions, is destructive and an affront to human dignity. Other communists may well have motives to oppress and seize power, or plenty of other motives.

Maybe? You think someone who doesn't believe in the validity of private property maybe has suspicious motives when starting a discussion about the merits of private property?
 

MrNiceGuy

Symbiotic Pnemonic
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2022
Messages
7,515
Reaction score
3,291
Location
The Twilight Zone
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Yes, and that had nothing to do with my question. :)
Your question had nothing to do with the discussion in the first place.

Whether anyone has a motive, suspicious or otherwise, is irrelevant to the question of whether a corporation should have constitutional rights. What say you on that point? Assume, for the sake of your answer, if you like, that everyone has suspicious motives.
 

MrNiceGuy

Symbiotic Pnemonic
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2022
Messages
7,515
Reaction score
3,291
Location
The Twilight Zone
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Coprporations may not be individual people but they do have rights. What makes anyone think differently.
Do they have Constitutional rights, like freedom of speech, assembly, religion, etc.?

The question "what makes anyone think differently?" is exactly what is being asked in the OP. If one says "no, they don't have constitutional rights," then whoever is saying that should explain why. It would be an interesting answer, I think.
 
Top Bottom