The statement 'So, you follow non-“bullshit” laws, but ignore the “bullshit” ones?' is part of a broader public discourse on the rights of citizens versus non-citizens, particularly in the context of free speech and deportation policies. The tone is confrontational and challenges the consistency of applying laws based on subjective judgments of their validity.
Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.The statement does not directly cause harm, but its confrontational tone could contribute to a divisive atmosphere.
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 engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does challenge the dignity of the person it addresses by implying hypocrisy.
[-1]Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is more focused on challenging the other person's stance.
[-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 engages in a form of personal attack by questioning the integrity of the person's adherence to laws, rather than focusing on the argument itself.
[-1]Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.The statement is part of a public discourse on free speech and uses the platform to question the application of laws, but it does so in a manner that could be seen as lacking in integrity due to its confrontational nature.