Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages with public issues, specifically critiquing policy proposals by a public figure and discussing their potential impact.
- The statement does not appear to cause direct harm with words and actions, but it is critical of the Harris proposals. The tone is dismissive, which could be seen as undermining constructive dialogue.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It focuses on policy critique rather than personal attacks.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 more focused on dismissing the proposals rather than fostering a constructive discussion. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not provide constructive feedback or engage in dialogue. It dismisses the proposals as 'awful' and 'not sensible' without offering alternatives or engaging in a deeper discussion. [-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 upholds the principle of free speech and uses the platform to express a critical opinion on public policy. However, the responsibility and integrity of the critique could be questioned due to its dismissive tone. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.