Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement by @ChadMizelle47 addresses a public issue concerning election laws and a lawsuit related to voter suppression, which constitutes public discourse. The tone is assertive and dismissive of the opposing viewpoint, suggesting the lawsuit was baseless and divisive.
- The statement does not directly harm others but dismisses the opposing viewpoint as a 'sham,' which could be seen as dismissive rather than harmful.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, but it does dismiss the opposing viewpoint in a way that could be seen as lacking respect for differing opinions.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 labels the lawsuit as a 'sham' and 'peddled division,' which could further polarize the issue. [-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, as it dismisses the lawsuit without addressing the underlying concerns or evidence, and uses strong language that could be seen as a personal attack on the lawsuit's proponents. [-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 free speech by expressing an opinion on a public issue, but the dismissive tone may not fully align with using the platform responsibly to foster constructive dialogue.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.