Reposted by Jake Tapper
The statement reports on a lawyer associated with RFK Jr. who is involved in selecting federal health officials for the Trump administration and has petitioned against the polio vaccine. This statement engages with public health policy and the implications of such actions, thus constituting public discourse.
- The statement itself does not directly cause harm, but it reports on actions that could potentially harm public health by challenging a widely accepted vaccine. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it presents a controversial action without context or explanation of the potential consequences. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it reports on a petition without providing a balanced view or counterarguments. [-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 highlights the influence of individuals in public health policy, but it does not use this influence for societal betterment, as it questions a vaccine that has historically been beneficial. [-1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by reporting on a public figure's actions, but it could be more responsible by providing context or expert opinions on the implications of revoking the polio vaccine.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.