In reply to:
Maggie 🇿🇦
@usernamemagmd
·
126d
The statement 'Could it not be both?' is a reply within a conversation about the impact of abortion bans on doctors. This conversation involves substantive engagement with public issues, specifically abortion laws and their effects on medical professionals, which constitutes public discourse.
- The statement is neutral and does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It seeks clarification rather than making a harmful assertion. [+1]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. [+1]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 asking for clarification, which can lead to a more nuanced discussion. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by asking a question rather than making a personal attack or ad hominem argument. [+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 responsibly by contributing to the discussion in a respectful manner. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.