BTW, opium is morphine-based, and morphine is perfectly legal, and used by hospitals worldwide every day.
Morphine may be "legal" but it is not legally available for public consumption in the U.S. It is a Schedule II drug under the Controlled Substances Act and can only be prescribed by a licensed physician. Therefore, your implication that morphine = opium in this context is not valid.
Corporations are voluntary contracts between individuals, and those individuals have rights, period. If some of you Slashdot commies fail to comprehend that, that is your problem and yours alone.
I agree, those individuals do have rights. So, let those individuals pay for the advertisements. If a collective of individuals wishes to pay for the advertisement, they can give an individual the money to pay for it. The bottom line for me is that the rights are a person's rights, a U.S. Citizen's rights, not a corporation's rights. Let the person spend the money and put their name on the advertisement. Does it become inconvenient for them to do this? Yes, but inconvenience is not an excuse. If some Chinese corporation wants to pay a U.S. Citizen to run a political advertisement here in the U.S., let them. As long as a U.S. Citizen puts their name on the bottom line, let them do it. They can bear the responsibility. Oh, yea, that's the whole issue. Nobody wants to be responsible for the advertisement by putting their name on it. But that's a whole different issue.
MSDOS is not dead, it just smells that way. -- Henry Spencer