The statement criticizes the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling on Covid vaccine mandates, suggesting that the court's decision aligns with conspiracy theorists. The tone is sarcastic and dismissive, and it questions the credibility of experts and authorities.
- The statement does not strive to do no harm; it uses a sarcastic tone that could contribute to public distrust in the judiciary and public health experts. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in direct cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does undermine the dignity of the court and experts. [-1]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; it is dismissive and sarcastic. [-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 uses a sarcastic tone and implies personal attacks on the court and experts. [-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.
- The statement does not uphold the principles of free speech responsibly; it uses sarcasm and dismissiveness rather than constructive dialogue. [-2]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.