The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue, specifically the comparison of two significant national honors and the implications of such a comparison by a former President. The statement involves a public figure, John Kelly, responding to comments made by another public figure, Donald Trump, which adds to the civic dialogue about the value and significance of national awards.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words and actions. It is a factual rebuttal to a public comment made by Donald Trump.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others. It does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It is a professional disagreement.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 clarifying the distinction between the two awards. It does not explicitly promote empathy or compassion, but it does aim to correct a perceived misstatement.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing the content of Trump's comments rather than attacking him personally. It focuses on the issue at hand.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 principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly to provide a counterpoint to Trump's comments.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.