So, can corporations marry?

[Atticus]

Since the US Supreme Court, AKA the "Heritage Foundation All-Stars", has apparently determined that corporations should enjoy the same rights as the flesh and blood bipedal omnivores known as "human beings", why should they not be permitted to marry? Corporations are already claiming the right to free speech and the right to privacy. Does anyone seriously doubt that this very fundamental right, which all non-gay Americans enjoy, will soon be claimed by one of the behemoths which seem to control more and more of our national agenda?

In the past, corporations wishing to "tie the not" did so by "merging". But, mergers, especially of the really big companies, were sometimes prohibited by those worrisome anti-trust laws. Those nasty anti-business liberals don't think it's a good idea for just a few giant firms to control an industry. They whine about "encouraging competition" and "consumer rights".

Well, not to worry, capitalists! These same libs have also argued loud and long for the expansion of "marriage" to include those not previously permitted to join their lives and fortunes in this time-honored way. How can they now argue against extending that right to corporate citizens?

Now, I am aware that some insist that the primary purpose or goal of the union we recognize as marriage is procreation. These folks used this notion to oppose the marriage of same-sex partners. Again, not to worry.

With sperm banks and rented wombs, corporations can easily become parents if that is a prerequisite for a marriage recognized by law.

And, if corporations can marry, mergers and buy-outs, with all that bothersome government regulation and oversight, will be history.

One final question: If a married corporation continues to screw the US consumer and work force, would it be guilty of adultery?

[xxqqqzme]

1. They merge and produce baby corporations.

Money can then move, virtually tax free, through the new corporations because that is what parents do, use the baby as a deduction.

[enough]

2. Beautiful, Atticus. (nt)

[msongs]

3. no if they're gay or lesbian nt

[izquierdista]

4. Go ahead, let them

I think we should also look out for the welfare of some of these older corporation excuse me, "non-corporeal persons". Some of them start behaving in anti-social ways and become incontinent, fouling the environment around them. When they do that, they really need care. They need to be taken to the rest home where they can be watched 24/7 and not allowed to wander off. With bland food and proper medication, they can live out the rest of their days without being a burden to those around them.

[pnorman]

5. And the "wife" can't be compeled to testify against the "husband" in court!

n/t

[Generic Brad]

6. That would threaten my marriage

The next thing you know, corporations will try to marry animals. That would severely threaten the sanctity of my marriage, let alone the sanctity of the animal.

:sarcasm:

[Historic NY]

7. If they have single personhood per the SCOTUS then they should pay a single tax rate.

[L0oniX]

8. Silly. Prostitutes don't marry their meaning full over night asscarrot relationships..

[HawkerHurricane]

9. Can corporations be owned?

I mean, wouldn't that be slavery?
Is Wall Street the world's largest slavery ring?