Considering the Supreme court’s decision equating corporate spending to free speech, and considering the court’s holding that a corporation is a legal person in the eyes of the law, bearing in mind Justice Roberts corporate bias and his desire to strike down laws regulating corporations, including those regulating corporate mergers, remembering that people have other rights that the court has recognized, including the right to marry, and that a corporate merger is much like a marriage, and seeing as corporations, while perforce sharing all rights that individuals have, including the right to marriage, are of uncertain sex, some saying female, others male, with most denying their sexual identity completely, but allowing for the fact that it must be said that when two corporations marry it is questionable that such a marriage is between a man and a woman, and recognizing that Roberts and his ilk want, whenever possible, to make their decisions appear to be intellectually consistent, is it possible that we can look forward to the court blessing same sex marriages so it can do the same for corporate marriages?
(Thanks to my brother Joe for passing on the picture).
Note: As I said in a recent post, I am cutting down on my blogging, to pursue other intellectual endeavors, primarily reading. I am also currently listening to a Teaching Company lecture series on “BUILDING GREAT SENTENCES” on the theory that since I inflict these things on others, I should at least learn to write. This post is my first attempt at putting my new found knowledge to work, the post itself being an example of what the lecturer calls a “suspensive” sentence also known as a periodic sentence, for reasons that make no sense whatsoever. He also advocates long sentences, which as you can see, that sentence certainly was, and this sentence certainly could be, if I didn’t feel like stopping right now.
Personally, I would say my sentence is “built”, but great it ain’t.
