"Should the owners be shielded from liability?" Absolutely.
The corporation is the one conducting business and thus it is the only one that should be liable for the debts of the business. Corporations serve a vital purpose of pooling capital from lots of people and allowing one entity to use the capital in our free market system.
"How one and the same person can have two "separate identities"? Can you have free market without personal responsibility?"
Again, the corporation has the responsibility, and rightly so because it is performing the business.
"The legal construct of corporation is to serve the common public interest. If this plain truth is forgotten it will lead to the erosion, reduction and abolishment of this construct."
WRONG. The legal construct of the corporation is to make a profit for its owners. It has nothing to do with the common good--that is Marxist language.
"Should the owners be shielded from liability?" Absolutely. The corporation is the one conducting business and thus it is the only one that should be liable for the debts of the business Corporations are not real beings and can do squat by themselves. It is the CONCRETE LIVING people who conduct business.
The legal construct of the corporation is to make a profit for its owners.
If it were so, the society in general should not be burdened with maintaining this curtain. If your way of looking at the institution of corporation prevails this institution will perish same way as old aristocratic privileges did. Once they stopped to serve useful social purpose (aristocrats risked their lives to provide safety for the whole society) it was matter of time before they were gone.
It has nothing to do with the common good--that is Marxist language.
What do you know about "Marxist language"? Have you read Marx or Lenin?