In reply to:
clausnitzer
@Clausnitzercan
·
8d
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
8d
clausnitzer
@Clausnitzercan
·
8d
The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the issue of book banning and the role of government in determining accessible literature, which are significant public concerns. The tone is assertive, aiming to clarify the role of the President in cultural matters.
- The statement does not use harmful language and focuses on the issue at hand, thus adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the dignity of others by not engaging in personal attacks 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 clarifying the role of government in cultural decisions, fostering a more informed discussion. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by addressing the issue without resorting to personal attacks, thus adhering to this principle. [+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 does not directly acknowledge or correct a mistake, but it is part of a conversation where a previous mistake was acknowledged and corrected by another participant.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement upholds free speech by responsibly discussing the implications of government involvement in literature access. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.