In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
75d
The statement and accompanying images engage in public discourse by addressing the ethical implications of medical practices on children with gender incongruence. The tone is critical and raises concerns about consent and potential harm.
- The statement raises concerns about potential harm to children, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. However, the language used is alarmist, which may not fully adhere to this principle. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement uses strong language that could be seen as disrespectful, particularly in labeling the actions as 'unethical scientism.' This may violate the principle of respecting the dignity of others. [-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 or empathy, as it uses charged language that could polarize the discussion. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does so in a manner that could be seen as a personal attack on the government, rather than fostering constructive dialogue. [-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.