seems reasonable to me
"only human beings, not corporations, are entitled to constitutional rights. money is not speech, and therefore regulating political contributions and spending is not equivalent to limiting political speech."
would you agree?
it's a simple concept, yet a profound one: corporations, invented to extend to individuals the right to pursue commerce within a separate legal entity having its own privileges and liabilities distinct from those of its members, cannot by virtue of being *something* be entitled to legal *everything*. however, our supreme court, in a bizarre moment of corrupt jurisprudence, had recently granted to corporations legal rights normally reserved by the constitution solely for individuals, and this legal mistake, ostensibly, observing their special status in the first place, in the opinion of many, has tipped the balance of political power in a dangerous direction. the group, "move to amend", in madison, wisconsin, has put the two simple sentences into a resolution to be submitted to redress this glaring wrong.
i, for one, am all for it.