Marianne Williamson

Rank 8 of 47

Score 136

Whereas the First Amendment gives us the right to peacefully protest, NSPM – 7 argues that any disagreement with their agenda creates the potential for violent extremism, therefore the government has the right to disrupt it. 2/

10/5/2025, 5:47:52 AM

In reply to:

Marianne Williamson

@marwilliamson

With NSPM-7, the Trump administration claims the right to replace the authors of the US Constitution in determining what freedom we will and will not be allowed. 1/

The statement engages in public discourse by addressing concerns about government policies and their implications on constitutional rights, specifically the right to protest and freedom of speech. It critiques NSPM-7, suggesting it undermines First Amendment rights by equating disagreement with potential extremism.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not directly harm others but raises concerns about potential harm to constitutional rights, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+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 criticism of NSPM-7 and the government's stance, but it does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, adhering to constructive dialogue. [+1]
Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
The statement upholds the principle of free speech by questioning government policies that may infringe upon it, using the platform responsibly to discuss public concerns. [+2]