Rapid Response 47
@RapidResponse47
·
5d
The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the implications of military obedience and the legality of orders, referencing a public figure's comments. It critiques the use of a movie as an analogy for real-world military conduct, suggesting a disconnect between fiction and reality.
- The statement does not directly harm but critiques a public figure's analogy, which could be seen as undermining their argument.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy but could be seen as dismissive, potentially bordering on disrespect. [-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, focusing instead on criticism. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but lacks constructive dialogue, focusing on a perceived flaw in the argument. [-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.