No shit we shouldn't make false statements but that in no way means we are under oath. It also doesn't open us up to perjury, but rather an ethics violation. One major hint of that fact is you cited a (model, not state specific) ethics rule and not a court procedure or state statute. But you'd know that if you had half a brain or half a law degree. You're a great example of larping though, so glad you showed up and both made and demonstrated your point about people being uninformed.
Edit: going on about how the ethics rule has been adopted.... and still isn't a court procedure or state statute.. why such toxic and uniformed people waste their time with being wrong and loud about being wrong, who knows. Go back to reddit.
Some day you'll grow up and realize that a woman doing something that has nothing to do with her looks or sexual attractiveness is not interested in your judgment or compliments on their looks or sexual attractiveness, and sexualizing them is low-eq simping
I'm also doubtful that you know the meaning of the word denigrating if you're disagreeing
What? No
Source: am attorney
Edit: thanks for the waste of time below which in no way shows we are "under oath"... why do people have to double down on being uninformed? problem in society and unfortunately, with some people, on this website.
Parts of images, websites, etc., doesn't get to your computer by coming down the pipe one after another. It's broken into groups of about around 1,000 characters/bytes, those get delivered, kind of in "envelopes", aka packets, and re-assembled.
Again that doesn't mean anyone is sworn
If we are talking about people who hate people, it is unfortunate you carry such a burden of failure in life that you need to be both uninformed and so vocal about it