3 ms·

Roses are flowers. Not all flowers are roses.

• salawat 8y ago
  Um... I think you just kind of fell down a set of logic stairs there amigo. While your and GP posts were valid, this is a case of valid reasoning being applied to unsound premises in that a corporation is not granted these property rights through personhood, but via it's being a corporation. This is one of the things that makes me spit every time I think of conceptual train wreck that was Citizens United. Corporations were not meant to be people. They were logical constructs with just enough personhood to distinguish the economic institution from the people making it up in the eyes of the law, such that higher risk ventures could be more easily undertaken through pooling of resources, and distribution of risk. That means, it is a false assumption to think of a corporation as Person+. It's more a case of being a !Person. Frankly, the entire idea of property rights sort of breaks down in light of possession being 9/10's of the law w.r.t your own body. As a free agent, you can do what you want. Just... Understand the additional risk brought on by the legal system rapidly backpedaling away if you do something outside the few clearly established guidelines, and other people with no interest in testing potential legal waters that may destroy them will have very little in the way of external incentive to help you do it. One of the things most uncomfortable about a common law system is how precedent in unrelated areas can composite together to create a law where no intent to have such a thing was ever established.