Marianne Williamson

Rank 9 of 47
|
Score 187
9/10/2024, 10:04:16 AM
X
In reply to:
JVW
@jvward
·
127d
@marwilliamson You can't have it both ways, Marianne. You can't in one breath say, "I want the federal government to guarantee full health coverage for every single resident of this country", and then in the next say, "I want all health records to be private and kept from government scrutiny."
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
127d
The idea that the government would under any circumstances have the right to see our medical records is totally and completely outrageous.

This isn't just a war on reproductive rights; it's a war on women. It's not just our bodies at risk here, it's our freedom.
Hillary Clinton
@HillaryClinton
·
128d
Republican officials are coming after interstate travel for reproductive health care.
https://apnews.com/article/abort…

The statement by @jvward constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about healthcare policy, specifically the implications of universal healthcare and the control over health outcomes by private insurance companies versus the government. The statement is a response to a broader conversation about healthcare privacy and reproductive rights, which are significant public issues.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm and is focused on clarifying a point about healthcare policy. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by not engaging in personal attacks or revealing private information. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by providing a perspective on how universal healthcare would function in terms of payment and control over health outcomes. [+1]
  4. 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 by addressing a specific point in the conversation without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]