Marianne Williamson

Rank 23 of 47
|
Score 41
8/7/2024, 11:53:04 PM
X
In reply to:
D D
@THE_ANDREW_D
·
366d
@marwilliamson I really like your reason and logic. I know we wouldn't agree on much politically but I would have liked to have seen you given a fair chance.
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
366d
@THE_ANDREW_D Already Eisenhower said “the American mind at its best is both liberal and conservative.” I agree with that.
D D
@THE_ANDREW_D
·
366d
@marwilliamson A solid education in social studies has made me the conservative I am today. I revere the Constitution and rule of law. I believe the founders gave us the best form of government possible but that it is inherently precarious and requires vigilant attention to maintain.
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
366d
Tim Walz argued as a teacher for a curriculum of kids learning about the Holocaust in the context of historical human rights abuses. He was right. Every American child should learn about the history of slavery and Jim Crow in the United States as well.

Learning about such…

The statement 'Thank you. Our agreements would have probably been more significant than our disagreements.' constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about political and ideological differences, contributing to civic dialogue.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm with words and actions. It is polite and acknowledges common ground, which promotes a respectful tone. [+2]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding, empathy, and compassion by focusing on agreements rather than disagreements, fostering a positive and constructive dialogue. [+2]
  3. 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 engages in constructive dialogue and avoids personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It acknowledges the potential for significant agreements, which is a positive approach to disagreement. [+2]