Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The utterly moronic "Peoples Rights Amendment"
ProfessorBainbridge.com ^ | 4-20-2012 | Stephen Bainbridge

Posted on 04/21/2012 7:07:38 AM PDT by SumProVita

"...my friend and colleague Eugene Volokh makes much the same point in his usual erudite way:

So just as Congress could therefore ban the speech of nonmedia business corporations, it could ban publications by corporate-run newspapers and magazines — which I think includes nearly all such newspapers and magazines in the country (and for good reason, since organizing a major publications as a partnership or sole proprietorship would make it much harder for it to get investors and to operate). Nor does this proposal leave room for the possibility, in my view dubious, that the Free Press Clause would protect newspapers organized by corporations but not other corporations that want to use mass communications technology. Section 3 makes clear that the preservation of the “freedom of the press” applies only to “the people,” and section 2 expressly provides that corporations aren’t protected as “the people.”

Congress could also ban the speech and religious practice of most churches, which are generally organized as corporation. It could ban the speech of nonprofit organizations that are organized as corporations."

(Excerpt) Read more at professorbainbridge.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; campaign; citizensunited; constitution; government; law; nancypelosi; pra
These people absolutely hate the notion of freedom of speech. What they seek is state CONTROL.
1 posted on 04/21/2012 7:07:47 AM PDT by SumProVita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
All they have to do is utter the magic words "the people" and Chrissy Mattthews pees his pants again.

The idea is that "the people" shouldn't have to worry about an old dusty constitution and can have anything they want.

2 posted on 04/21/2012 7:15:27 AM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

What is so amazing is that this is all blatantly OBVIOUS...and the general public seems unaware.

Sheeeeeesh....


3 posted on 04/21/2012 7:25:16 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Nancy Pelousy ping. Thanks SumProVita.


4 posted on 04/21/2012 7:29:22 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (FReepathon 2Q time -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
What they seek is state CONTROL.

Only if THEY control the state.

It is about power.

They wish to deny free speech to people who run companies because they do not want free and open debate concerning the legislation they propose that would force these corporations to do their bidding.

Free and open debate exposes the costly non-sense that is all of this environmental controls that the left continues to impose in violation of the law and common sense.

5 posted on 04/21/2012 7:33:28 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

And let’s not forget churches. They would REALLY like to control speech connected with authentic Christians (many of which are generally organized as corporations).


6 posted on 04/21/2012 7:42:53 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

7 posted on 04/21/2012 7:45:02 AM PDT by tomkat (...shall NOT be abridged)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

“The public” remains in rectal defilade most of the time.


8 posted on 04/21/2012 7:45:34 AM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
I walked out of a local Methodist Church about 50 years ago when the preacher started raising funds to build a field hospital for the Viet Cong.

The Sunday before that he was raising funds for Handgun Control Inc.

The commies have been highly influential in mainstream religion for decades.

9 posted on 04/21/2012 7:50:00 AM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

These are the issues and opportunities that the spineless GOP refuses to seize and demagogue with the efficiency and effectiveness that the DNC and media did with the SS reform (Robbing S from old people), The contraceptive mandate (War on women), the Bush tax cuts (Tax cuts for the rich) etc.

This is another golden opportunity to show the tyranny and control inherent in the socialist ideology of democrat control.

The GOP will punt. They’ll make a few shallow comments and then reach across the isle and pet someone.


10 posted on 04/21/2012 7:51:36 AM PDT by CrappieLuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

“For the enemies of religion cannot leave it alone. They laboriously attempt to smash religion. They cannot smash religion; but they do smash everything else.” ...GK Chesterton


11 posted on 04/21/2012 7:51:44 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

This for all practical purposes would nationalize the media. Also, as noted, it would censor churches because most churches are big bad corporations. So the right of free speech is atomized - you as an individual may privately speak but people joined together in an organization or corporation have no freedom of speech. But the people are supposed to have the right to “peaceably assemble” and speak. Here our communists want to make it so only you as an isolated individual can speak and you can speak only in ways that would be ineffective. Four more years of Obama - no more First Amendment.


12 posted on 04/21/2012 8:09:33 AM PDT by Wilhelm Tell (True or False? This is not a tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
the preacher started raising funds to build a field hospital for the Viet Cong.
I think I'd like to hear a few details before I believe that.
13 posted on 04/21/2012 8:12:59 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven
I heard it clearly.

The Methodist Church took part in the founding of handgun Control Inc.

Much earlier I can recall sitting in Sunday School with literature praising leaders of the Chinese Revolution.

14 posted on 04/21/2012 8:20:46 AM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
They fear churches because churches sowed the seeds of the American Revolution.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

"It was Sunday morning early in the year 1776. In the church where Pastor Muhlenberg preached, it was a regular service for his congregation, but a quite different affair for Muhlenberg himself. Muhlenberg's text for the day was Ecclesiastes 3 where it explains, 'To everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven; a time to be born, and a time to die, a time to plant, and a time to pluck what is planted...'"

"Coming to the end of his sermon, Peter Muhlenberg turned to his congregation and said, 'In the language of the holy writ, there was a time for all things, a time to preach and a time to pray, but those times have passed away.' As those assembled looked on, Pastor Muhlenberg declared, 'There is a time to fight, and that time is now coming!' Muhlenberg then proceeded to remove his robes revealing, to the shock of his congregation, a military uniform."

"Marching to the back of the church he declared, 'Who among you is with me?' On that day 300 men from his church stood up and joined Peter Muhlenberg. They eventually became the 8th Virginia Brigade fighting for liberty."

"Frederick Muhlenberg, Peter's brother, was against Peter's level of involvement in the war. Peter responded to Frederick writing, 'I am a Clergyman it is true, but I am a member of the Society as well as the poorest Layman, and my Liberty is as dear to me as any man, shall I then sit still and enjoy myself at Home when the best Blood of the Covenant is spilling? ...So far am I from thinking that I act wrong, I am convinced it is my duty to do so and duly I owe to God and my country."



15 posted on 04/21/2012 8:31:42 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
Congress could also ban the speech and religious practice of most churches, which are generally organized as corporation. It could ban the speech of nonprofit organizations that are organized as corporations."

First thing that comes to mind is The Heritage Foundation.

Governed by an independent Board of Trustees, The Heritage Foundation is an independent, tax-exempt institution. Heritage relies on the private financial support of the general public—individuals, foundations, and corporations—for its income, and accepts no government funds and performs no contract work. Heritage is one of the nation’s largest public policy research organizations. More than 710,000 individual members make it the most broadly supported think tank in America.

The Heritage Foundation is the nation’s most broadly supported public policy research institute, with nearly 700,000 individual, foundation and corporate donors. Heritage, founded in February 1973, has a staff of 255 and an annual expense budget of $75.3 million.

Our mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.


16 posted on 04/21/2012 8:35:32 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” ...Alexander Solzhenitsyn


17 posted on 04/21/2012 8:36:19 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Even among conservatives.


18 posted on 04/21/2012 8:38:42 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TLI

Yes, the repercussions of such an amendment are compelling.

By the way, I love this from your home page:

“How do you tell a communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin.

And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
Ronald Reagan


19 posted on 04/21/2012 8:39:27 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Unfortunately, you are correct...but this is not nearly to the extent that you find among liberals.


20 posted on 04/21/2012 8:40:50 AM PDT by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

No further need to distort the Commerce Clause or circumvent the enumeration of powers in Article I, Section 8. Call it the Freeway Amendment. No stop signs, no speed limit. Idiocracy, here we come.


21 posted on 04/21/2012 8:42:43 AM PDT by TADSLOS (Conservatism is not a party slogan, but a mindset guided by core values and walking the walk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita
Yep. I put it right at the top of the list.

Hammer - nail - POW!

.

22 posted on 04/21/2012 8:45:41 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER

Same my church. Decades ago they,started raising money to be sent to Idi Amin, S.E Asia and communist groups. When I asked the minister he defended it by saying while most of the money went to dictators, communists, and military, a little would make it’s way to the people who needed it.

I rarely attend that church now.


23 posted on 04/21/2012 9:10:37 AM PDT by prisoner6 (Right Wing Nuts bolt the Constitution togethegr as the loose screws of the Left fall out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SWAMPSNIPER
I heard it clearly. The Methodist Church took part in the founding of Handgun Control Inc.
Yeah, and you also said the same church was soliciting money a week later, to build a hospital for the VC.
The VN War was over in January 1973 and Handgun Control wasn't founded until 1974.
The VC were extinct (by death and the '73 peace treaty), so how could anyone be building them a hospital?
24 posted on 04/21/2012 10:12:03 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; SumProVita; cripplecreek; AJFavish; theothercheek; Tenth Amendment; SecondAmendment; ...
Notice that labor unions aren't explicitly excluded from the definition of "person" in Section 2 of the proposed Amendment. So corporations can be deprived of rights that unions maintain. Only the Left would characterize this inequality as "fairness."

Incidentally, Chuckie Schumer recently called Citizens United the worst SCOTUS decision since Plessy v. Ferguson. Since Plessy was decided in the 1890s, that's really covering a lot of ground. Does Schumer really think, for instance, that the SCOTUS allowing corporate entities to make public comments about political candidates running for office is worse than the SCOTUS upholding President Roosevelt's power to send innocent Japanese Americans to detention camps during WWII (Korematsu case, 1944)? And would Schumer be forced to change that statement when and if the SCOTUS strikes down Obamacare?

25 posted on 04/21/2012 10:55:37 AM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

The time period I am talking about was the early 60s. I was in high school until 1960. The preacher was raising funds for gun control not very long after that, maybe not under the specific name HCI, but gun control just the same. The Methodist Church did play a role in anti gun activism along with the National Council of Churches and the World Council of Churches. The NCC and WCC are leftist anti American to the core and have been for decades. No American church had or has any business being affiliated with either.
In 1973 I was 31 years old and had been fighting the gun control agenda for 16 years. I joined the NRA when I was 14.


26 posted on 04/21/2012 11:15:33 AM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

Corporations and soilent greens is both peoples. All corporations are formed by people. Their stock is owned by people, or by other corporations whose stock is somewhere along the line owned by people. People serve as directors and officers. They employ people, and they provide goods and services to people. All an evil corporation is (most are not evil) is a reflection of the evil people hiding behind it. If their evil gets sufficiently egregious, they go to jail anyway, and the corporations gets liquidated. These are the facts of life. Corporations do not love or hate. They do not mate or date. They simply are. And the people who make it run have as much right to speak through the corporation as they do in person.


27 posted on 04/21/2012 2:09:38 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

Chuck Schumer is one of the worst as I’m sure you already know. As stated above all these people really want is control, they like power over others and they like that they can skirt the very same rules and regs that they want to impose on everyone else. Things like this absurdity are transparent. They somehow convinced the GOP to go along with campaign finance reform that exempted corporations but allowed unions to finance campaigns. And they still lost. It wasn’t until Obama swept them in that they regained control and they thoroughly abused that power, upset longstanding congressional precedent in order to cram down our throats the largest federal power grab since FDRs presidency. And they did it just after an election which was a referendum n that very idea and which saw them lose more seats than they had seen in a generation. So of course they are want to silence critics.

More than that though, it is against the very idea of a free country and a free people that the entities affected by laws and regulations should have no political voice to protest those very rules and regulations. Only a control freak would want a law that allows them to silence their critics, and the fact that the people keep sending men and women like Schumer back to represent them is sad and scary.


28 posted on 04/24/2012 12:39:58 PM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson