You do not understand the basic principle - the comapny got what it paid for, the family got what it paid for. That is fair. Period.

The problmeis lefties never understand this - as they, poor souls, believe in ENTITLEMENT, where people are given what they have not paid for or earned, they will never get this basic principle of fairness.

Using my person, my identity, against my knowledge and for your personal benefit is fair? It must be that your concept of what fair is is totally at odds with my understanding of the word and its meaning. Oh, and I do understand the "basic principle". It's called greed.

This reasoning coming from a man of the cloth is troubling!!!

MJ's tour was a business, and that is normal insurance coverage, but for a Corporation to benefit from from an employees death, and to topo it off , without the employees consent, is even more troubling .... isnt that what the Mafia does when they lend you money???

Think about this you secret Mephistopheles worshipper, what happens when the company misses budget big time, do they put a hit on you???? Cant you see the wrong in that !??!?!??!?!

No!

A company invest money in an employee. Training, healthcare, benefits. i see no problem with them protecting their financial investment.

Something akin to that argument was used in the past as a justification for slavery. People aren't a commodity.

A company in trouble packs its employees in an executive jet - and the jet crashes - saves teh company. Who caused the crash - a third party with a one million dollar payoff.
America is stupid to think of corrupt schemes like this and although I dislike Moore all thanks for exposing yet another US corrupt scheme,
S.

Life insurance = slavery?

BTW, you do know it took many blacks 2 generations to recover from the end of slavery - you might want to watch Color Purple

Mafia Loansharking = Life Insurance?

Now you are really reaching for that race card huh?

Well, Mr. C's argument is that since a company pays for this then to hell if the employee knows or not, the company has rights on the fact that they invested, period. If you read some of the arguments made for slavery in the antebellum South one would come across things like... we (slavers) pay for their medical bills, we pay for their food, baptisms, weddings, etc...trained them to be blacksmiths, etc,,... It's not like the slaves are not getting anything out of it! After all, we're "investing" in them! A similiar argument in the sense that it stems from a mindframe that human beings are commodities and to be treated as such, independent of how the individual might feel because someone else made an "investment".