Religion & Law

I do not have a strong opinion on Citizens First v. FEC, and I'm inclined agree with Kevin's assertion that the range of goods corporations are likely to pursue in their political speech are "material, consumerist, and sensuous goods, ones fit for economic growth, but not fit for living authentic, effective human lives."  But is this limited range of goods intrinsic to the nature of the corporation, or does it also reflect our limited understanding of the corporation's potential?  Even under the "nexus of contracts" conception, there is no reason why corporations cannot stake out more distinctive roles as venues through which the values necessary for "authentic, effective human lives" can be pursued and expressed.  As Alasdair MacIntyre puts it, we discover the common good -- and even our individual goods -- not through theoretical reflection, but through "everyday shared activities."  Can corporations be one type of venue in which those shared activities occur?  I've tried to develop the argument further in this paper.