-8
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
52d
The statement and accompanying image engage in public discourse by addressing societal issues related to gender identity, legal definitions, and perceived psychological phenomena. The tone is critical and dismissive, suggesting that those who disagree with the court's ruling are experiencing 'mass psychosis' and have 'psychiatric & personality disorders.'
- The statement may cause harm by labeling dissenting views as 'mass psychosis' and associating them with mental disorders, which can stigmatize mental health issues. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not respect the dignity of those with differing views, potentially engaging in a form of cyberbullying by labeling them negatively. [-2]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement lacks empathy and understanding, dismissing opposing views without constructive engagement. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive dialogue, instead resorting to ad hominem attacks by labeling opponents as having disorders. [-2]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.