In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
121d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
121d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
121d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
670d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
121d
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
121d
The statement 'This was a bad decision on a badly argued case' is part of a broader discussion on free speech and government influence on media. It critiques a legal decision, suggesting it was poorly reasoned. The conversation involves concerns about government censorship and the First Amendment, indicating engagement in public discourse.
- The statement does not directly harm but critiques a decision, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by engaging in a discussion about free speech and government influence. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism of a legal decision without personal attacks. [+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 uses influence to discuss societal issues related to free speech and government actions. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.