Darin Gillies
@dagsteel
·
73d
The statement engages in a public discourse about the interpretation of a Supreme Court ruling and the broader implications of due process and constitutional rights. The tone is confrontational and accusatory, suggesting that the other party has not fully engaged with the material or is misrepresenting constitutional principles.
- The statement does not strive to do no harm, as it accuses others of being too comfortable justifying actions without due process, which could be seen as harmful or dismissive. [-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 does imply a lack of respect for the other party's understanding or position.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 is accusatory and dismissive rather than seeking to understand the other party's perspective. [-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 includes personal attacks and dismissive language rather than fostering a productive conversation. [-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.