France and Human Rights

President John Adams had sent several delegates, one of them being John Martial, to France to help sort out the issues between France and the US, such as the United States not honoring the Franco-American Treaty, formed back during the American Revolution, when France had its revolution, by meeting with minister Talleyrand of France. Three of Talleyrand’s men met with the delegates and told them Talleyrand refused to meet unless a large amount of money was payed. The delegates returned home and informed President Adams, who was outraged. The name of the Affair comes from the substituting of the three French men’s’ names with X, Y, and Z in a Congress report.

The development of a human rights policy in the EU has been a long and often undocumented journey. The sectoral approach of the Paris Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 had an economic and functional intention, lacking a declaration of fundamental rights, as seen in national constitutions. It was not until the 2000 Nice Summit that the European Union first established a written charter, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, explicitly stating and guaranteeing human rights in the European Union. Documented EU human rights policy before 2000 can be seen primarily in two ways:

Respond to the question: How do you think the male-female breakdown of the population would have affected life in New France at that time?

and is a monumental day in history as it is still celebrated as a national holiday in France. The storming served as the beginning of the end of the ancien regime for in the proceeding years divine right monarchy would be abolished from France completely.

People question more hateful satire and ask “if we must use satire, can we not be gentler and more subtle?” (Ward). Religious hate does more than hurt the feelings of those it is directed towards; it also contributes to discrimination. Perhaps satire that is especially vindictive toward religions, particularly minority groups, should face consequences. Imprisonment for producing satire would be unreasonable, but small fines would be appropriate. Discrimination and hate deserve punishment, because free speech has its limits. Charlie Hebdo faced criticism from politicians who attacked what they believed were reckless and irresponsible drawings, although the magazine’s editor, Charbonnier, claimed that he is “not putting lives at risk” (Greenhouse). However, there is irony behind his statement. Just years after Charbonnier defended his illustration, the office of Charlie Hebdo was attacked by terrorists and eight people were murdered, including Charb himself. They say that hindsight is 20/20, but once lives outside of the satirist are put in danger, it is the duty of this artist to do what is safe for

The United States as well as France both experienced dramatic economic and social hardships, which eventually led to revolution. As the French people pushed to overthrow the absolute monarchy established many years ago, America fought for independence from Great Britain, resulting in new understandings of liberty and new rights.

On August 26, 1789, the National Assembly of France passed the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, a document that would become the cornerstone of the French Revolution. Influenced heavily by the American Revolution and the Enlightenment, the ideas seen in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen can be traced to documents from these time period, outlining “liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression” as the basic rights of men. All four of these ideas can then be broken down into the individual rights that not only made all men equal under the law, but put France on the road towards a constitutional monarchy.

Satire and controversy never really exist without each other, every article that is written, every image that is taken and every cartoon which is drawn, somebody with a slightly different interpretation may take an element of offensive. Charlie Hebdo continually exercised their right to freedom of speech and pushed boundaries that no other publication dared to but they did not single out and or target Islam or the Prophet Muhammad, they targeted pretty much anything that was relevant.

This can be seen when discussing France as a secular nation, how religion and the state are at conflict with each other and how adherents of Islam are uniform with beliefs in relation to this potentially unconstitutional law.

The term ‘cuius regio eius religio’, ‘the religion of the ruler is the religion of all of his subject’, applies in France's largely irreligious society in the sense that it suggests an absolute power, with a single political task; the care of its population, which in this case ought to abide secularism. The“crisis of laïcité ” is embedded in a political struggle over the model of France’s future, one which aims to maintain a secular personality of the French Republic. Anniversary of the French Revolution in 1989 - reiterates issue of Universalism being a defining trait of republican France. However, as Casanova suggest the secular is a ‘central, modern category’, aïcité constructs/frames a reality based on its differentiation and separation from the religious.Thus, in terms of French Secular politics Universalism in the public sphere is limited to individuals who practice secularity/ reinforce the nation’s drive for laïcité. The way in which the French community negotiates two conceptual boundaries, establish secularity and subvert religion , as Asad suggests, tell us how people live in the secular. This personality of the French state expresses itself through law, media and education and as a result of this, The headscarf is held to be a religious symbol that conflicts with and is a threat to

Charlie Hebdo, the French satirical magazine, has been a face of controversy since its establishment in 1969. It publicises opinions regarding highly provocative topics, these of which are often perceived as offensive due to focus on modern day taboos. On 7th January 2015, the publisher became the target of a ruthless terror attack at its offices in Paris. The suspects behind the incident were jihadists, Cherif and Said Kouachi. The brothers stormed into the building and executed 12 people, ranging from the caretaker of the premises, to the editor of the publication, Stephane Charbonnier. When the two were fleeing, witnesses who sought refuge on top of buildings nearby heard the brothers yelling, “We have

One way the American and European discourse around the Charlie Hebdo shootings differs from the Muslim discourse is that almost no americans know why the extremists were so angry about a few blasphemous images of the Prophet Muhammad. After all, Charlie Hebdo makes fun of christianity too, with satirical images of Jesus Christ. What most people do not know is, muslims are culturally against any depiction of Muhammad, and even some of the people close to him. Professor Amin Saikal, director of the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies at the Australian National University, says, “It 's simply because Islam has been opposed to any form of icon worship, therefore, there is no accurate drawing of the Prophet and it has been banned from the very beginning.”

Freedom and justice are what England’s Bill of Rights, France’s Declaration of Rights for Men, and America’s Bill of Right all have in common. All three countries did not like the rules or leaders at the time thus, revolutions against them occurred. Then, these documents were created because people wanted change. The first of the three is England’s Bill of Rights which inspired America’s Declaration of Independence, which lead to France’s Declaration of Right for Men. Furthermore, I will explain the contents of each document, how all three documents relate to one another, and which of these I would prefer to live under.

Islam is the second most widely practiced religion in France, with the country being home to the largest Muslim population in Europe. Undoubtedly, France has faced various challenges in its attempt to achieve integration between its citizens and several issues have arisen during the last few decades. In order to comprehend the complexity of issues related to assimilation and integration, it is important to understand the different aspects of these issues and identify the reasons behind them to provide the fundamental basis needed to tackle them.

Glendon, Mary Ann (2002). A world made new: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Random House. ISBN