Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement involves a political candidate's proposal to change the structure of the Supreme Court, which is a significant public issue. The tone is assertive and suggests a strong stance on judicial reform, indicating a desire to address perceived dysfunction in the judicial system.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but could be seen as polarizing, potentially leading to divisive discourse. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does target specific justices for impeachment, which could be seen as undermining their dignity. [-1]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 promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is more focused on political strategy than fostering dialogue. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, as it calls for drastic measures without engaging with opposing views. [-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 uses influence to propose significant changes to the judiciary, which could be seen as an attempt to better society, but it is contentious and may not be viewed positively by all.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by expressing a political opinion, but the responsibility and integrity of the proposal could be questioned due to its divisive nature.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.