[laughinghan]

I mostly agree with you (I upvoted you), but I want to push back on two things.

1. "Why would you knowingly give them access even if you think you're doing everything right?"

Depending on the circumstances, maybe I respect their integrity and character for risking their livelihood and more to expose wrongdoing?

2. "It's just that we don't care because corporate citizens do not get the same rights as actual human citizens."

They shouldn't get the same rights. They only exist to be liability shields. Unlike the people they are composed of, nothing about them deserves empathy or fundamental rights---we grant them certain rights as a matter of public policy, not principle, because it makes our economic system work, and if that were ever to change, their rights should be changed or abolished accordingly.

[skookumchuck]

There's clear right and wrong, and then there are grey areas open to interpretation. There are ALWAYS grey areas. Who wants to get involved in litigating those?

For example, consider your taxes. Tax laws are always open to interpretation. You might believe you are doing everything correctly on your taxes, that the way you read the rules was correct. But would you still be undergoing a lot of stress if the IRS decided to do a compliance audit on you?

[laughinghan]

Did you mean to reply to someone else?