it's a matter of simple courtesy and respect. If we want to receive those considerations, we need to first extend them to others.
I disagree (surprise surprise). The golden rule is not that easy to weaponise.
First, there is no true reciprocity here. I don't want to "receive [special/unusual] considerations". Ordinary conventional use of language is sufficiently polite, kind and considerate.
Second, not giving a beggar a dollar is not the same as stealing a dollar from him. Not using special/unusual language in reference to person's requesting we do so is not equivalent to being "unkind and inconsiderate" (or "discourteous and disrespectful") to those persons.
Rather, making requests for special/unusual language
unkind and inconsiderate, because with such requests one is sprinkling the field of communication with be-careful-how-you-speak landmines. Those who make such requests are saying, in essence, "speak in the way we approve or be accused of unkindness and discourteousness."
All good points. As to weaponizing the Golden Rule ("do to others as you would have them do to you"), I feel you missed the most important point:
Sometimes the charitable, loving thing to do, that we should all hope others would do for us, is to say the hard truth, and call the person out.
The Bible (one source for the Golden Rule) rightly tells us to do this privately first, then publicly if that doesn't do it. But correcting others is the right thing to do in many (most?) situations. And usually it can be done with kindness and respect.
If you are doing something that could well get you seriously hurt or killed, you would hope that someone noticing it would speak up, right? When we tell a small child "no, don't touch that, it's hot!" they may throw a fit, but you saved them from harm, and once they mature enough to understand, they will be grateful. But at that moment, they were upset because you didn't let them play with the hot things fresh from the oven. Hurt feelings are not necessarily evidence of anything wrong having been done.