Latest Breaking News

Ruby the Liberal

(26,644 posts)

29. Corporate "free speech"?

Reply to Eugene (Original post)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 09:00 PM

Aug 2012

That is a mortifying concept, regardless of the topic.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

U.S. court strikes down graphic warnings on cigarettes [View all] Eugene Aug 2012 OP

The world moves forward, we move backward. nt onehandle Aug 2012 #1

Mitt Philosophy: Corporations are people.. cyclezealot Aug 2012 #3

There Are Already Health Warnings n/t Suziq Aug 2012 #7

No - We Harass Smokers Suziq Aug 2012 #4

Don't talk about "ridiculous prices" Spider Jerusalem Aug 2012 #9

it's not about you! Carolina Aug 2012 #35

Alcohol isn't dangerous when used correctly. NutmegYankee Aug 2012 #39

Exactly. DeSwiss Aug 2012 #14

This photo is why I have a problem with it Mojorabbit Aug 2012 #21

After developing devastating health consequences..... DeSwiss Aug 2012 #30

Is there a single person in the US who is not already aware that smoking is bad for them? 4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #22

Children. They are the official unofficial targets of Big Tobacco. onehandle Aug 2012 #25

And kids are thoroughly motivated by longterm consequences 4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #38

Meanwhile, the federal gov't is giving almost $200 million of OUR MONEY annually to tobacco farmers slackmaster Aug 2012 #2

Tobacco products here in the UK feature large and graphic warnings. Spider Jerusalem Aug 2012 #5

Canada has them, Australia's working on it TrogL Aug 2012 #11

You'd think that one on the bottom left would be enough for most guys to quit alarimer Aug 2012 #28

They know it is BS former9thward Aug 2012 #33

Vasoconstrictors lead to ED it isn't rocket science. Exultant Democracy Aug 2012 #40

If it was as simple as that scores of millions of smokers would not be having sex. former9thward Aug 2012 #41

That is like saying smoking doesn't age your skin, because it's age related Exultant Democracy Aug 2012 #42

You have an agenda so evidence doesn't matter to you. former9thward Aug 2012 #44

A bought-and-paid-for court system. nt valerief Aug 2012 #6

yep. Not very pretty, is it ailsagirl Aug 2012 #26

The people attempting to have these graphics have far more money than Big Tobacco. former9thward Aug 2012 #34

More graphics/ads are needed IMO CountAllVotes Aug 2012 #8

I quit, and it's not that hard... xtraxritical Aug 2012 #19

Reuters did not link to the USCA-DC opinion as a reference... xocet Aug 2012 #10

I'm happy about this. Are we going to put graphic warnings on cars, booze, prescriptions, etc.? ZombieHorde Aug 2012 #12

Can't compare any of those. alp227 Aug 2012 #17

Actually, cars do cause accidents when used as directed. ZombieHorde Aug 2012 #18

Fatalities from unavoidable car accidents are very rare muriel_volestrangler Aug 2012 #32

cigarettes have no redeeming value Carolina Aug 2012 #36

Nothing really has redeeming value because all value is subjective. ZombieHorde Aug 2012 #37

I suspect that they are a cash cow for government primavera Aug 2012 #43

This judge brought to you by our friendly Resident W! benld74 Aug 2012 #13

There we go again..."corporate" free speech rights..... Swede Atlanta Aug 2012 #15

"corporate speech rights" are an unconstitutional legal farce foisted upon us by a corrupt court. Vincardog Aug 2012 #20

Were there not already enough warnings that cigarettes may cause health problems? 4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #23

Don't like this trend..."corporate speech rights." dixiegrrrrl Aug 2012 #16

good WooWooWoo Aug 2012 #24

It's a dumb idea. MrSlayer Aug 2012 #27

Corporate "free speech"? Ruby the Liberal Aug 2012 #29

When do we get graphic images on HFCS...or white flour...or alcohol... MercutioATC Aug 2012 #31

I know an anti-smoking picture that would WORK to dissuade kids from smoking jmowreader Aug 2012 #45