13 ms·

It bothers me how people don't understand (or don't believe in) the principles of law. Law means that there are objective rules to behavior, which don't take i

It bothers me how people don't understand (or don't believe in) the principles of law. Law means that there are objective rules to behavior, which don't take into account positive intent, goal, or player. That's why we have to put up with hate speech, so that not "politically correct" regular speech will be legal. Same thing here. If you don't want there to be a "truth committee" which clears all news before publication, you better hope that corporations have freedom of speech. If corporations don't have freedom of speech, then neither does the EFF, ACLU, or your posts on Facebook.

hga 10y ago
Thanks for your boost to my point about freedom of speech, but mine was more narrow, i.e. almost all large groups of people acting in concert form corporations for all the usual reasons. Exceptions include institutions that far predate corporations, like the Roman Catholic Church, where each Archbishop personally owns the resources of his see for the duration of his holding the position, which was why the Church entered an amicus curiae in the prosecution of Sun Myung Moon, the precedent established would allow the government to throw every Archbichop in prison, and they have far too much experience with that and worse happening.... So these include the National Rifle Association, a 501(c)(4) non-profit corporation, which is one way America's gun owners combine for collective political action. And which as I recall also filed an amicus curiae in Citizens United, McCain-Feingold very specifically targeted them (McCain, and I assume Feingold, hated it, and if not then, then I would assume for the latter now, after his unexpected failure to return to the Senate).
- donw 10y ago
  I believe the ACLU works in a similar fashion.
  - hga 10y ago
    Indeed they do, the national ACLU proper is a 501(c)(4) like the NRA, and both have 501(c)(3) charities for stuff that fits with and is legal to do under those constraints. E.g. the NRAs' does pro-bono legal work and the other "raises and donates money to outdoors groups and others such as ROTC programs, 4-H and Boy Scout groups" and in general funds education (and has been a contributor to the remarkable improvement in gun safety statistics). Heh, and on the ACLU Wikipedia page, "In 2006, the ACLU of Washington State joined with a pro-gun rights organization, the Second Amendment Foundation, and prevailed in a lawsuit against the North Central Regional Library District (NCRL) in Washington for its policy of refusing to disable restrictions upon an adult patron's request." I'm sure this happened because a) the Second Amendment Foundation's 2 activities are running an important annual conference and b) lawsuits, and they're in Washington state. And in either case, government censorship of their core political speech, which in theory reflects that of their members (not always entirely true for the NRA), is intolerable and why Citizens United was absolutely necessary.

hga 10y ago

Thanks for your boost to my point about freedom of speech, but mine was more narrow, i.e. almost all large groups of people acting in concert form corporations for all the usual reasons. Exceptions include institutions that far predate corporations, like the Roman Catholic Church, where each Archbishop personally owns the resources of his see for the duration of his holding the position, which was why the Church entered an amicus curiae in the prosecution of Sun Myung Moon, the precedent established would allow the government to throw every Archbichop in prison, and they have far too much experience with that and worse happening.... So these include the National Rifle Association, a 501(c)(4) non-profit corporation, which is one way America's gun owners combine for collective political action. And which as I recall also filed an amicus curiae in Citizens United, McCain-Feingold very specifically targeted them (McCain, and I assume Feingold, hated it, and if not then, then I would assume for the latter now, after his unexpected failure to return to the Senate).

donw 10y ago
I believe the ACLU works in a similar fashion.
- hga 10y ago
  Indeed they do, the national ACLU proper is a 501(c)(4) like the NRA, and both have 501(c)(3) charities for stuff that fits with and is legal to do under those constraints. E.g. the NRAs' does pro-bono legal work and the other "raises and donates money to outdoors groups and others such as ROTC programs, 4-H and Boy Scout groups" and in general funds education (and has been a contributor to the remarkable improvement in gun safety statistics). Heh, and on the ACLU Wikipedia page, "In 2006, the ACLU of Washington State joined with a pro-gun rights organization, the Second Amendment Foundation, and prevailed in a lawsuit against the North Central Regional Library District (NCRL) in Washington for its policy of refusing to disable restrictions upon an adult patron's request." I'm sure this happened because a) the Second Amendment Foundation's 2 activities are running an important annual conference and b) lawsuits, and they're in Washington state. And in either case, government censorship of their core political speech, which in theory reflects that of their members (not always entirely true for the NRA), is intolerable and why Citizens United was absolutely necessary.