The Rabbit Hole
@TheRabbitHole84
·
174d
The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the U.S. Constitution and its role in protecting free speech, even when that speech is considered repugnant. This qualifies as public discourse as it addresses a significant public issue: the limits and protections of free speech under the U.S. Constitution.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm with words and actions. It is a factual assertion about constitutional protections. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others and does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It acknowledges that some forms of speech are repugnant but does not endorse them. [+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 explaining the constitutional basis for free speech protections, even for speech that is considered offensive. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by addressing a point made by another user without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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 providing a reasoned argument about constitutional protections. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.