Reposted by Dr. Jill Steinš»
The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the issue of political decision-making and the moral considerations involved in voting for political figures. It draws a parallel between voting for Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, suggesting that voters may overlook significant issues or controversies associated with these figures.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but implies moral equivalence between voters of different political figures, which could be seen as divisive.Ā [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but it could be perceived as dismissive of the complexities of individual voting decisions.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, as it simplifies complex political decisions into a binary moral judgment.Ā [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive dialogue and could be seen as a personal attack on the character of voters, rather than fostering discussion.Ā [-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.