« Dubs and The O - Another Comparison | Main | Hey Wisconsin... hold the phone »

It would give new meaning to the notion of a hostile corporate takeover

Those familiar with the ACLU know that they have a penchant for taking on unusual causes.

This one may just top them all:

The Florida ACLU is hoping its push will get women to take control of their reproductive health and keep politicians from taking their abortion rights.

"Businesses get special treatment these days," the group said. "If lawmakers and other politicians see your uterus and your body as a business, maybe they'll work to get government out of the uterus regulation business as they do for every other company."

Abortion advocates say that social conservatives in Florida are attempting to usurp women's reproductive rights and that applying business terms to body parts will somehow help stop Republicans' pro-life effort.

"The point is that Republicans are always talking about deregulation and big government" said ACLU ally Democratic state Rep. Scott Randolph in a floor debate in the Florida House of Representatives. "But I say their philosophy is small government for the big guy and big government for the little guy. And so, if my wife's uterus was incorporated or my friend's bedroom was incorporated, maybe the Republicans would be talking about deregulating."

Taking the analogy and running, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida Howard Simon echoed Randolph.

"The Florida Legislature -- and extreme social conservatives across the country -- are taking rules and regulation off of businesses and adding them to uteruses," he said.

Aight folks... let's hear, in a PG rated way please, why this might be a good idea.

Comment away.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/41399.

Comments (41)

The ACLU brought up a good ... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

The ACLU brought up a good point. Social Conservatives want the government to regulate the behavior of individuals. While Business Conservative oppose the government's regulation of businesses. The ACLU's comments were tongue in cheek and not meant to be taken literaly.

Corporations cannot cast vo... (Below threshold)
kyle:

Corporations cannot cast votes. If the corporate uterus is inextricably intertwined with the human host, can the host vote, because doing so would permit the corporate entity to cast a ballot as well? Does the analysis change if the core of the voter intent is to allow abortions or other procedures directly affecting the corporate uterus?

How about this one. Even i... (Below threshold)
DaveD:

How about this one. Even if you're a landlord you don't have the automatic right to evict a tenant just because you arbitrarily find them inconvenient. Where does the ACLU stand on tenant rights?

OK, so if we incorporate ce... (Below threshold)
Tom:

OK, so if we incorporate certain gangland operations, then murder-for-hire can also remain untouched by those "rabid conservatives"?

Sometimes wrong is just plain wrong --- not as a political thing but just as a moral/ethical thing.

Many pollutants are known t... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

Many pollutants are known to cause complications in pregnacies that result in birth defects and higher infant mortality rates. Yet the same social conservatives that seek regulation to protect unborn babies from abortions, frequently oppose regulations that would protect babies from pollutants.

To continue the analogy, I ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

To continue the analogy, I am hardly surprised that a parasite (the ACLU) would object to the body (America) fighting it with antibodies (Conservatives).

But the ACLU is being disingenuous; their historic and cultural focus has not been on the uterus, but the rectum, from which proceeds so much of their argument.

Social conservatives are FA... (Below threshold)
Big Mo:

Social conservatives are FAR behind liberals who seek to regulate behavior of individuals: what you can eat, what you can drink, what you can drive, what products you can use, what products you can make or serve, how you can use your own land, where you do business, where you can live, what you must accept in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity," etc. etc.

The very people who are SOOOO concerned about all of the above and making sure we're eating, drinking, living and thinking "correctly" according to liberal values are usually the same ones saying "Hands off my uterus!"

Tina ..."Social Co... (Below threshold)
Jeff:

Tina ...

"Social Conservatives want the government to regulate the behavior of individuals."

Really ? they may want the government to restrict abortion but that is because they beleive it is murder. Can you cite another issue besides abortion where Social Conservatives are calling for government interference ? just one ?

Now liberals want to force you to use certain lights, force auto companies to sell electric cars and raise the mpg on their fleets to certain levels ... liberals want to force everyone to not eat certain foods or spices and how much fat is to be in your food ...
liberals have passed laws that take away choices everyone previously had in terms of their healthcare ...

Maybe you haven't been paying attention but its not Social Conservatives that want the government to regulate the behavior of individuals ...

Yeah, I hate "takovers". T... (Below threshold)
Pile of Pooh:

Yeah, I hate "takovers". They're so... well, tak-y.

Here, have an "e", Rick.

=oP

Really ? they may want t... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

Really ? they may want the government to restrict abortion but that is because they beleive it is murder. Can you cite another issue besides abortion where Social Conservatives are calling for government interference ? just one ?

The first one that comes to mind is amending the constituion to ban gay marriage. I don't think the role of the government is to say you can marry this person or that person, but we won't let you marry him/her. Under no conditions should the government take on such a role, even in the case of gay marriage.

Tina S. never contributes t... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Tina S. never contributes to the argument. Had she been more thoughtful, she would have seen the error of her stance.

It is also telling the ACLU says only republicans are pro life. I would say there are many democrats that are as well.

BigMo you nailed it. Apparently Tina S. thinks murdering babies is equal to eliminating salt. Conservatives are against state sponsored murder of innocent babies. ww

I wonder, does the ACLU now... (Below threshold)
Baggi:

I wonder, does the ACLU now support rape?

Surely a charge of "breaking and entering" would be less of a sentence and social stigma than rape.

Why does the ACLU support rape?

Department of Unintended Co... (Below threshold)

Department of Unintended Consequences.

If a woman's reproductive organs are a business then that business OWNS that which it produces, and may do with that product as it wishes, for the lifetime of that product until it is sold or given to a new owner. Can you say chattel slavery?

In addition, what portion of the product belongs to the provider of the requisite genetic material required to initiate the production process?

These folks really suck at thinking things through, don't they? Why would anyone want such lack wits to be in charge of anything?

I don't give a rat's ass wh... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

I don't give a rat's ass what Tina does or doesn't with her uterus. JUST DON'T ASK ME TO PAY FOR IT!

As for the ACLU - same bullshit. Different day. But then, they never were good at analogies.

It is also telling the A... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

It is also telling the ACLU says only republicans are pro life. I would say there are many democrats that are as well.


No where in the article is the ACLU saying only republicans are pro life.

Here ya go Tina: MONEY quo... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Here ya go Tina: MONEY quote, 2nd paragraph:


"The point is that Republicans are always talking about deregulation and big government" said ACLU ally Democratic state Rep. Scott Randolph in a floor debate in the Florida House of Representatives. "But I say their philosophy is small government for the big guy and big government for the little guy. And so, if my wife's uterus was incorporated or my friend's bedroom was incorporated, maybe the Republicans would be talking about deregulating."

Taking the analogy and running, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida Howard Simon echoed Randolph.

"The Florida Legislature -- and extreme social conservatives across the country -- are taking rules and regulation off of businesses and adding them to uteruses," he said.

Tina S.The point i... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Tina S.

The point is that Republicans are always talking about deregulation and big government-ACLU

Okay. ww

IIRC, in most states (excep... (Below threshold)
alanstorm:

IIRC, in most states (except NV), incorporating your reproductive organs as a business is illegal.

So, the ACLU is arguing in favor of prostitution? Gonna need me some more popcorn...

BigMo you nailed it. App... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

BigMo you nailed it. Apparently Tina S. thinks murdering babies is equal to eliminating salt. Conservatives are against state sponsored murder of innocent babies. ww

Birth defects and the death of babies from industrial pollutants is not murder. Corporatations are not evil entities that desire to harm & kill babies, so I would not call it murder. A corporations primary concern is to increase their bottom line, not to protect the interests of the people. However, one of the roles of the government is to protect the interest of the people, that is what the government is suppose to do. If a persons primary motivation in opposing abortion is to protect babies, then they should also be motivated in protecting babies from other sources of harm. Also, I'm referring to toxic industrial chemicals and heavy metals, not salt. There's a big difference.

Tina: The most commonly ha... (Below threshold)
epador:

Tina: The most commonly harmful substances to fetuses are alcohol and tobacco. The most expensive problems are from meth and cocaine (your premie nurseries in most big hospitals are flush with them). Are these the horrible industrial chemicals you are talking about? I sure don't see Republicans promulgating their use. Maybe I missed something coherent in your argument.

The point is that Republ... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

The point is that Republicans are always talking about deregulation and big government-ACLU

The irony is that social conservatives want the government to address social issues by expanding regulation and increasing governments role in what should be personal decisions, such as who you can and can't marry.

Really ? they may ... (Below threshold)
James H:
Really ? they may want the government to restrict abortion but that is because they beleive it is murder. Can you cite another issue besides abortion where Social Conservatives are calling for government interference ? just one ?

1) Same-sex marriage
2) Choice-of-law provisions in contracts
3) Fourth-Amendment and Sixth-amendment rights (though to be fair, this is a bipartisan infringement now)
4) Academic freedom, particularly harassment of academics who research global warming.

Aight folks... let... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
Aight folks... let's hear, in a PG rated way please, why this might be a good idea.

LOL. You want to hear why it might be a good idea for people to incorporate their individual body parts? I sometimes enjoy playing the devil's advocate, but I literally can't think of how this could be a good idea in any way whatsoever. It is the stupidest idea I have heard of since at least the beginning of the year, and that is saying something.

Of course, there are all kinds of idiots out there, but that an organization with as much prestige and influence would put their credibility behind such a ridiculous idea shows just how far out of whack the left has become. Although the ACLU has done many thing with which I disagree, they also have some serious accomplishments under their belt that I would give them credit for (the fight to end segregation, ending the bans on interracial marriage, etc).

What a joke.

And Eighth Amendment rights... (Below threshold)
James H:

And Eighth Amendment rights.

If you incorporate your ute... (Below threshold)
Neo:

If you incorporate your uterus, you might have to pay business "use" tax in order to have sex.

If you incorporate your ute... (Below threshold)
Neo:

If you incorporate your uterus, you might have to get a permit to "build" a child.

I can just imagine the fun ... (Below threshold)
Neo:

I can just imagine the fun of an OSHA inspection

Sooo... If a woman incorpor... (Below threshold)
docjim505:

Sooo... If a woman incorporates her womanly parts, does that mean:

(A) She can get a trademark or patent for them?

(B) She has to pay corporate taxes on any money she gets for their use? (Neo's original idea)

(C) She can write off (ahem) grooming or cosmetic surgery as a business expense?

(D) She can claim depreciation on tax returns? Hmmm... THAT could be interesting. Would (for example) a porn star's... er... corporate property depreciate faster than the average woman's?

(E) Would the woman have to keep detailed usage records for her... er... corporate entity?

(F) Could an unattractive woman file for bankruptcy if nobody wants to use her... um... services?

And do we really, really want to dehumanize women by making them nothing more than non-mechanical transport mechanisms for a corporation?

If I incorporate my whole b... (Below threshold)

If I incorporate my whole body, can I apply for an Obamacare waiver?

Would it help if my various organs unionized first?

J.

James @ 22, I must take isu... (Below threshold)
alanstorm:

James @ 22, I must take isue with your examples.

Same-sex marriage - can't buy this one. Opposition to SSM only came about when other folk decided that SSM was somehow an undeclared civil right, and that anyone opposeing it was an evil homophobic bigot. Support SSM or oppose it, this is strictly in reaction to another's actions. No point.

Choice-of-law provisions in contracts - never run across this term, so no opinion at this point.

Fourth-Amendment and Sixth-amendment rights - you've already conceded that these infringements are bipartisan.

Academic freedom e.g. AGW researchers - have you been asleep for a decade or so? The harassment and interference has been going the other direction for 99% of that time.

Eighth Amendment - ? You'll have to elaborate here.

Tina: The most commonly ... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

Tina: The most commonly harmful substances to fetuses are alcohol and tobacco. The most expensive problems are from meth and cocaine (your premie nurseries in most big hospitals are flush with them). Are these the horrible industrial chemicals you are talking about? I sure don't see Republicans promulgating their use. Maybe I missed something coherent in your argument.

Not sure the point your trying to make. The fact that alcohol, tobbacco & drugs harm fetuses does not negate the harm from industrial polution. They are all bad. I do feel that those who harm their fetuses through alcohol, tobbacco & drugs to be committing a form of child abuse/endangerment and in some cases should be prosecuted. There is a difference between industrial pollution and alcohol/tobbacco/drugs. A mother taking alcohol/tobbbacco/drugs is knowingly poisoning her baby. When a pregnant woman is exposed to industrial pollution she is not doing so by her choice.

When oh when might we get t... (Below threshold)
Don L:

When oh when might we get to realize that social conservative are not disqualified from being greatly concerned about financial/property rights matters? Nature's God, it seems, Who gave us our rights didn't say they couldn't be used in several ways. Immoral deceitful leftists need to be opposed because of the evil they seek to do -whether i's on the abortion table - weakening our defenses/sovereignity, or taxing away our hard eraned money to buy votes.

I suspect the hatred from the right against social cons is because they aren't in favor of morality in all areas, as in "leave my porn and pot alone" and "I have a right to kill my offspring" but don't touch my money? Why else would they exhibit so much hatred toward a fellow conservative?

1. Most conservatives real... (Below threshold)
Hcddbz:

1. Most conservatives realize their is a social contract.
We do regulate some behavior no murder, rape, stealing.
Then hierarchy of cultural. Things come into effect can a 16 year hold consent to sex? What age can one person snags in a contract. so yes we do regulate behavior all the time it what governments do. The question has always been to what level this is done.

2. Deregulations does not been no regulations it means reducing the level of regulations. One can smother a business with too many laws and procedures.
I worked on wall street in the 90 and for e first part of this decade. the litterly mount ants of rules and laws by a multitude of agencies. Yet we often here how their is not enough las. Simple fact is that we have so many laws no one know s how to enforce them or how to abide by them. simplify the rules so everyone know how to act and everyone know how to enforce them. This would taken billions of dollars spent on BS and allow companies to hire and be more profitable

Abortion. This is question that society has consider.
We want to protect the defenseless and we also believe that a person cannot be derived of life, liberty or property without due process.

A Child unborn or born is a person that is what many believe in fact in many states you kill a women and her unborn child you are charged with two counts.

At the same time others argue about the viability of the fetus outside the womb and it is that viability that determines if it a child or not.

Other argue that it might be a child but if something horrible occured to produce it you could terminate it. Such as rape. now Roe was in Texas and abortion was legal in the case of rape. However Wade thought she was lying which she was. (Roe did have the child by the way)
So is this just about women rights? What about the child? When does a person begin? All this things come into play.
I think it is a lazy argument to make a women body a corporation because Iit could be bought and sold not just by her but by others and it also could be used in trade. Things we have fought hard to abolish.

Alan: You are completely i... (Below threshold)
James H:

Alan: You are completely incorrect.

First, to re-cite the original challenge:

Can you cite another issue besides abortion where Social Conservatives are calling for government interference ? just one ?

Please keep this in mind.

Same-sex marriage - can't buy this one. Opposition to SSM only came about when other folk decided that SSM was somehow an undeclared civil right, and that anyone opposeing it was an evil homophobic bigot. Support SSM or oppose it, this is strictly in reaction to another's actions. No point.

Incorrect. In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that the right to marry a person of one's choice is a fundamental right. Advocacy of same-sex marriage is a deliberate attempt to expand that right. Attempts by social conservatives to derail same-sex marriage, including the introduction of same-sex marriage laws at the federal and state level, directly interfere with the expansion of that right.

Note: The original challenge did not require bipartisan agreement on what constitutes an "individual right." It merely required that a person cite instances where social conservatives advocate government interference.

Choice-of-law provisions in contracts - never run across this term, so no opinion at this point.

That would be the continual hobby-horse about prohibiting the application of sharia law and international law in court decisions. Under classic choice-of-law principles, individuals have the right to choose what laws will govern their contracts. A statute or amendment that forbids the application of "foreign law" by definition interferes with this right.

Fourth-Amendment and Sixth-amendment rights - you've already conceded that these infringements are bipartisan.

If infringements are bipartisan, then by definition social conservatives are advocating government interference. Point to me.

Academic freedom e.g. AGW researchers - have you been asleep for a decade or so? The harassment and interference has been going the other direction for 99% of that time.

Actions in the other direction are completely irrelevant to the challenge as it was worded. Today, I directly note actions by Virgina Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who is using state law to harass a global-warming researcher at the University of Virginia. Again, government interference in individual liberty.

Eighth Amendment - ? You'll have to elaborate here.

Cruel and unusual punishments. In particular, I'm thinking of excessive drug-law sentences, as well as the treatment of detainees in the war on terror.

Tina, your fabricated indus... (Below threshold)
epador:

Tina, your fabricated industrial pollutant crisis is tsunamied by the real toxic results I mentioned. Is that clearer?

James HMarriage in... (Below threshold)
hcddbz:

James H

Marriage in Western world is between 1 man and 1 women. The question in loving was can people of different ethnicity. Now in other societies we do see people who plural marriages but again that was between man and women or women and men.
Even in society with the open celebrations of homosexual their was not SSM. This has only appeared in the last 30 years. It was a direct out growth of the AID. In that a segment of society felt that homosexuals did not get treatment because they were not embraced by society. This has led to them have a protected status.
So for an institution to be redefined of course there is going to be push back.
Also we know that the government and some of it supporters with try and force churches to perform SSM even if it goes against their core beliefs. So of course people cannot be disinterested parties.

Direct outgrowth of the wha... (Below threshold)
James H:

Direct outgrowth of the what?

Direct outgrowth of the wha... (Below threshold)
James H:

Direct outgrowth of the what?

Direct outgrowth of the wha... (Below threshold)
James H:

Direct outgrowth of the what?

James, you are still incorr... (Below threshold)
alanstorm:

James, you are still incorrect on most items.

Re: SSM, you lose. hcddbz points out in #36 that the decision was not as broad as you imply. You then go on to admit the SSM advocates are trying to expand the scope of the decision. If you're poking the tiger with a stick, you get no sympathy from me when you lose a hand. SSM advocates created their opposition on this one - were they not pushing their point, there wouldn't be any opposing force.

"Under classic choice-of-law principles, individuals have the right to choose what laws will govern their contracts." Wrong. The applicable laws of the locality where the contract is implemented govern. If there is a dispute, then courts or an arbitrator decides the governing laws. The parties to the contract don't get to simply choose the laws!

"If infringements are bipartisan, then by definition social conservatives are advocating government interference. Point to me." Wrong. you can't claim infringement by the opposition and ignore infringement by allies. Moot point - awarded to no one.

Re: academic interference, not buying it. The sheer weight of abuse against AGW infidels cancels out your insignificant objection. Don't try to argue this one, dude. No one will buy it.

I agree with you about excessive drug law sentences. WOT detainees? Not so much. I don't buy the "they just HAPPENED to wander onto the battlefield" or the "they just HAPPENED to be BFFs with known terrorists, but had NO IDEA what they were all about!" arguments.

I understand the ACLU stand... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

I understand the ACLU stand makes sense in 3 out of 5 insane asylums.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy