Because we aren’t talking about what corporations say, we’re talking about their right to speech. We’re talking about rights. Rights are not conditioned on a moral compass (or your idea of where it should point). Even immoral assholes have rights.
If you no longer want to discuss it, then fine. I still hold it’s reasonable to hold a discussion on what kind of rights non-human entities and things have and should have, and that it’s reasonable to necessarily be 100% convinced that they all get the exact same rights in the exact same way.
It’s not a right, so then we should be worried that the government could take it a way at any time, right?
So you want to consider the idea that churches don’t have freedom of religion and news organizations don’t have freedom of the press? No thanks, not interested.
Good point - we should simply not have any rights because we can just not worry instead.
No, especially since “freedom of the press” is explicitly called out, and therefore press organizations explicitly have this right (which is one of the few examples in which a type of non-human entity is explicitly called out as having rights in the constitution). “Free exercise of religion” would similarly protect the right of the people to practice their religion in church settings.
I thought you wanted a discussion on this – if you didn’t want to discuss it, and only wanted agreement and/or to rant, then why didn’t you post it in the Pit?
It really might be reasonable for people to disagree on this. I might not be evil or stupid – just in honest disagreement on some differing assumptions and understandings.
Best wishes to you in all things, even if you don’t want to discuss it.
I’ll worry about what seems reasonable and rational – and the fear that government might restrict the legality of shitting seems neither reasonable nor rational.