Is it appropriate to confer upon businesses/corporations/entites/etc. the same constitutional or other rights that we confer upon individuals/citizens?
Is the phrase, "corporate citizen," an oxymoron?
Do you think that talking about entities as if they are "thinking persons" seems to muddle or confuse some issues that arise in our cultures?
I think that most would agree that businesses don't have the same "inalienable" rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. Rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are more akin to what many call "basic human rights."
The vast majority of businesses exist to produce profit. Making money is their "raison d'erte." It is relatively easy to interpret motivations for their actions (e.g., sponsoring Little League teams as an extension of Marketing to increase sales/patronage or to generate Good Will which is an intangible Balance Sheet Asset).
Non-profit organizations exist for a variety of purposes. Motivations for their actions will vary.
Example A:
Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that the amounts of moneys spent by businesses (and entities like labor unions) in candidate elections could not be limited or banned because such monetary political contributions represent Free Speech. The resources of many corporations can exert significant influence on democratic elections. Should entities have such a right to Free Speech?
Example B:
Some establishments permit smoking in the workplace, creating a hazardous/unhealthy work environment for employees. Such a hazard (i.e., second-hand smoke) might be reasonably eliminated. Do such entities have a "right" to conduct their business while putting employees at risk?
Example C:
Many times I hear comments to the effect of, "I have to balance my checkbook; why can't the government do the same?" or "We need to run government more like a business." Can such comments, that don't recognize how individuals, businesses, and governments, are different, confuse how we solve problems?
What other examples do you see?
Is the phrase, "corporate citizen," an oxymoron?
Do you think that talking about entities as if they are "thinking persons" seems to muddle or confuse some issues that arise in our cultures?
I think that most would agree that businesses don't have the same "inalienable" rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. Rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are more akin to what many call "basic human rights."
The vast majority of businesses exist to produce profit. Making money is their "raison d'erte." It is relatively easy to interpret motivations for their actions (e.g., sponsoring Little League teams as an extension of Marketing to increase sales/patronage or to generate Good Will which is an intangible Balance Sheet Asset).
Non-profit organizations exist for a variety of purposes. Motivations for their actions will vary.
Example A:
Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that the amounts of moneys spent by businesses (and entities like labor unions) in candidate elections could not be limited or banned because such monetary political contributions represent Free Speech. The resources of many corporations can exert significant influence on democratic elections. Should entities have such a right to Free Speech?
Example B:
Some establishments permit smoking in the workplace, creating a hazardous/unhealthy work environment for employees. Such a hazard (i.e., second-hand smoke) might be reasonably eliminated. Do such entities have a "right" to conduct their business while putting employees at risk?
Example C:
Many times I hear comments to the effect of, "I have to balance my checkbook; why can't the government do the same?" or "We need to run government more like a business." Can such comments, that don't recognize how individuals, businesses, and governments, are different, confuse how we solve problems?
What other examples do you see?
