Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
The statement critiques a public figure's response to a significant public issue—climate change—by questioning the alignment of their proposed actions with environmental goals. The tone is skeptical and somewhat incredulous, suggesting a disconnect between the public figure's actions and the expected environmental policies.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm directly but raises a critical question about a public figure's policy, which is a legitimate part of public discourse.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 the public figure's policy stance rather than personal attributes.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement aims to promote understanding by highlighting a perceived inconsistency in the public figure's stance on climate change, though it does so in a skeptical tone. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by questioning the policy stance rather than attacking the individual personally. [+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 principles of free speech and uses the platform to question a public policy responsibly. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.