Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
Briahna Joy Gray
@briebriejoy
·
502d
The statement by @briebriejoy constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue, specifically the actions of the Biden administration and the implications of voting for Kamala Harris. The statement by the user appreciating the conversation also falls under public discourse as it endorses and amplifies the original message.
- The statement by @briebriejoy uses strong language ('rewarding genocide') which can be seen as harmful and inflammatory. This violates the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not respect the dignity of others, particularly Kamala Harris and the Biden administration, by accusing them of genocide without providing substantial evidence. This can be seen as a form of harassment or hate speech. [-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 uses accusatory and divisive language. [-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 severe accusation without offering a platform for discussion or understanding. [-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 upholds the principle of free speech, it does not use the platform responsibly or with integrity due to the inflammatory and accusatory nature of the language. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.