In reply to:
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
556d
The statement is critical of the bill's potential to grant the President excessive power and the risk of arbitrary enforcement due to vague definitions. It contributes to the discussion on the balance between national security and free speech.
- The statement aims to do no harm by raising legitimate concerns about the bill's impact on free speech and executive authority. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the content of the bill rather than personal attributes. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding by highlighting specific aspects of the bill that could be problematic. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism of the bill without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement is open to correction if new information about the bill's implications were to emerge. [+1]Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement uses its influence to raise awareness about potential issues with the bill. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech by defending the right to hear speech and questioning the bill's impact on this right. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.