Marianne Williamson

Rank 21 of 47

Score 57

@ChavaProduction No conscious person excuses the atrocities of October 7. And no conscious person excuses what Netanyahu has done and is doing in Gaza. Anyone acting like either is excusable is only throwing gasoline on the fire. Recognizing the multiple layers of good and evil here is part of

6/4/2025, 2:02:13 PM

In reply to:

MAK

@ChavaProduction

27d

@marwilliamson If you cannot see that Hamas is pure evil, then I really can't help you. The savages that supported Hamas are in the same category. The unspeakable sadistic barbarianism they demonstrated on Oct. 7 was off the spectrum of humanity.

MAK

@ChavaProduction

28d

@marwilliamson You either support Israel, or you support Hamas. There is no middle ground. Up to now, you have supported Hamas.

Marianne Williamson

@marwilliamson

28d

We seem to have gone from calling for justice for Palestinians - a call with which I wholeheartedly agree - to an absurd romanticization of a gigantic death cult. That cult is not just coming for the Jews. Those who continue yelling “We’re not antisemites!!!” while at least

The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the complex and contentious issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, specifically the actions of Hamas and the Israeli government. It calls for a nuanced understanding of the situation, rejecting the binary view of support for either side and condemning violence from both parties.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement strives to do no harm by condemning violence and atrocities committed by both sides, promoting a balanced view. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement promotes understanding by acknowledging the complexity of the situation and the presence of both good and evil on multiple sides. [+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.
The statement engages in constructive criticism by challenging the binary perspective and encouraging a more nuanced dialogue, avoiding personal attacks. [+2]