Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
The statement involves a public figure making a claim about the cognitive health of President Biden, which can be considered a substantive engagement with a public issue. The tone is accusatory and speculative, and the intent appears to be to cast doubt on President Biden's mental fitness for office.
- The statement potentially causes harm by making unverified claims about someone's health, which can contribute to misinformation and public distrust. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not respect the privacy and dignity of President Biden by speculating on his health without concrete evidence, which can be seen as a form of harassment. [-2]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; instead, it seems to aim at discrediting a public figure. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it makes a personal attack on President Biden's cognitive abilities without providing substantive evidence or engaging in a respectful discussion. [-2]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.
- While the statement falls under free speech, it does not use the platform responsibly or with integrity, as it spreads potentially harmful and unverified information. [-2]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.