If Corporations are people...

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by GiMpY-wAnNaBe

Hasn't this definition been stretched a little bit though? Considering that corporations under "freedom of speech" construed as freedom to give campaign donations has allowed corporations' donations to be indistinguishable from those given by persons?

note***- i'm asking the above question based on an article I read about a year ago, so sorry if thats not quite how it works.

Yes, but all organizations are treated this way under the Citizen's United decision, not just corporations. Unions are given freedom of speech as well. IMO, the media tends to concentrate on Corporations because they believe that corporations are evil and unions are good, but in the end they are both simply collections of people who share common interests (mainly self-interests).

Let's put it this way, for every Time Warner Cable lobbying the government for SOPA and PIPA and funding SuperPACs to get friendly people elected, there is a Google who is spending millions to fight it the same way. But you only hear about the unfairness of Time Warner Cable, as if no moneyed interests are in opposition.

Now I'm not against Citizen's United being reversed, but it would have to be reversed for all organizations and mandate that all donations be unlimited, transparent, and from individuals only. Actually, I'd greatly prefer that model. The problem is those that are against Citizen's United want to keep "person-hood" for organizations they like and remove it from those they don't. This does not pass the Constitutional sniff test of equal protection under the law.