In reply to:
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
26d
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
26d
The statement is part of a public discourse discussing the aesthetics and symbolism of national monuments in Washington DC, contrasting them with proposed changes by a political figure. The tone is critical and aims to highlight a perceived misunderstanding of national values by the political figure in question.
- The statement does not directly harm with words but uses a critical tone to express disagreement with a political figure's actions.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity, focusing on public actions rather than personal attacks.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding of the symbolic importance of national monuments, though it could be more empathetic.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism of a public figure's actions without resorting to personal attacks, maintaining a focus on the issue at hand. [+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 upholds free speech and uses the platform to engage in civic dialogue about public monuments. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.