Human Rights And The Lack Thereof

The topic of human rights has been a well-documented and deliberated subject throughout history. There are various conflicting views about human rights, many of which have led to conflict’s in the past. American philosopher Martha Nussbaum detailed her capabilities approach on the theory of human rights in 2001 in “Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and Social Justice. Nussbaum’s central human capabilities have since been used in a wide variety of philosophy literature, notably in “Cosmopolitanism a philosophy for global ethics” by Stan Van Hooft. Nussbaum’s capabilities theory is centred around 10 major elements. This essay will critique and analyse Nussbaum’s theory, and assess if Nussbaum’s elements are of central importance to understanding human rights. In my opinion, what is of central importance to human rights is fair values and equal opportunity. This entails that every individual no matter what situation they are born into should have adequate access to resources to reach their full potential. This includes and is not limited to race, gender, sexual orientation and religion. Society has recently started to take a stand against this violation of our human rights and will hopefully continue to stamp out any negative behaviour hindering the potential of individuals in society. Throughout this essay the capabilities that Nussbaum outlined will be individually evaluated on whether they are of central importance in understanding human rights and if they follow within what I believe to be of central importance to understanding human rights.

A great speech has the power to define the times, to inspire, and to motivate. Certain speeches from great people have made huge impacts, but “The Struggle for Human Rights” from Eleanor Roosevelt persuades the entire globe on humans’ rights, freedom, respect and peace. I read her text and saw a video on YouTube giving her speech even though it was long it gathered a lot my attention. It took me time to understand her speech after reading it three times. It’s good that someone like Eleanor Roosevelt existed and wanted to provide some peace to the world. I’m glad she touched many hearts in that time. War may still exist and can be caused but we should all take a glance to this speech and acknowledge what Eleanor was trying to do. She fought for social and civil rights, helped found the United Nations, and effectively ran the United Stated when her husband was ill. As shown above, all those awful situations led Eleanor Roosevelt to do such a speech as “The Struggle for Human Rights”.

Ruled by the Chinese Communist Party for more than six decades, China remains a near authoritarian state, which violates numerous human rights in accordance to the U.N.’s human rights conduct daily, including freedom of expression, association, assembly, and religion. The unjust actions of the communist government is apparent to even to those who see it from the outside, the Chinese government continues to lie to its people about the state of its country and how “stable” they seem. In reality many reforms need to occur in order for the Chinese government to revert to a more humane state and until then china will remain a large enemy of human rights activists and a more equal country.

The gay community has been thriving over the last several years especially within the law, state after state bans fell and proposals passed. The movement is finally being recognized and basic rights are being promised to them in several courts around the country. In states like Idaho one could be fired or be denied housing for being gay, and that being the sole reason. When the bill, to add sexual orientation to the human rights act, was simply eligible to be put up to a vote the people who proposed it were overjoyed. They know the road is long and still work towards it, the smallest accomplishments feel like strides. Why is this attitude still

The inalienable human rights is something undeniably important in the view of everyone in the world, as nearly all government in the world have some sort of written law that ensure the rights of its citizens, like the Bill of Rights that protect the rights of Americans. Yet, when applying that significance in protecting human rights to people outside of their nation’s border depend considerably on the interests of the government, the interactions between the different nations, and the response concluded from the international institution, like the United Nations. As evident through the events in Rwanda, all members of the United Nation Security Council expressed their concerns and sadness about the human rights abuses in Rwanda by the Rwandan government, yet, when debating on the course of action, only a minority of the members actually supported humanitarian intervention in Rwanda. The violations on the principle of human rights in Rwanda were ignored as several council members cited the lack of funds and resources, along with infringement on sovereignty to be the reasons of nonintervention, despite the widespread support of these natural rights. Even if a proposal of intervention was passed, the movement to protect these human rights often failed due to the difficulty to come to a compromise when determine how the intervention would played out, as countries tried to pursue the policy in their own stance, as well as the crucial aspect of the response time. Although the

Human rights are universal rights that we are entitled to. It is a freedom that is guaranteed based on the principle of respect for an individual. As mentioned in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, human rights are a “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all member of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world” (Kent, page 80). When asked what our rights are, we tend to get different answers and meanings. Some people recite the rights that they know; but let’s face it, not everyone knows all of the rights that they truly have. The rights we have consist of many things such as the right of having an adequate food supply. The right to

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

After examining the readings, it is easy to conclude that unauthorized immigrants to the United Sates do not have enough rights. There are laws that protect migrants, such as a few that were discussed in “The Development of International Human Rights Laws” which protects individuals from torture, or enslavement; individuals also have their right of freedom of religion, along with other basic human rights that were not mentioned (Laets). However, the doctrine that was signed by the United States to protect people within its borders is still lacking in important rights that could further protect migrants from harm.

From Article 25.1 under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it classifies that health and medical care is a basic human right. Although this document has no legalize backing, most countries support it and base their own policy on it. Human rights are important, as, without it, no one will have any freedoms and will harm their own health and health care access. While rights are important, for the safety of public health, people’s freedom might be taken away temporarily (isolation, for example). Individual human rights are important and should be protected.

Every single human being on this planet has rights (What Are Human Rights, n.d). These rights are given to us through birth, and the day I was asked, what my human rights were, I found myself speechless. I did not know how to answer the question, which at the time sounded so easy. I forgot about the question that had me so puzzled, and just brushed it off, ironically six month later I get an assignment on the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. After reading this historic document, I realized how important human rights are. I believe most people take human rights for granted, we know they exist, but we don’t even know what they are and what they entail. This made me think

Human rights are rights that are believed to belong justifiably to every person no matter what situation, race, or gender. The people get to decide what is wrong and right, from voting, to being treated unequal, being called a minority, to there being government officials mistreating the way humans view things. “Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without servitude and compelling victims to commit sex acts for the purpose of creating discrimination.” ("Ckmgrey." Ckmgrey. Web. 17 Apr. 2016.) These rights are what protect us, they help all of us such as difrent genders, and race. Human rights were given to us to protect us from harm but there are evil people who do not care and will make you feel like you’re nothing and not worthy of rights. Human trafficking makes people feel like they’re nothing and or maybe even would rather kill themselves then have to live through all the painful things those people do.

Human Rights is a set of moral and legal guidelines that promote and protect a recognition of our values, our identity and ability to ensure an adequate standard of living (AHRC, 2017). They are designed to be enjoyed by everyone regardless of factors such as race, sex or disability. In Australia, this includes the right to feel safe, to have food, shelter and water, to be provided with education, employment and health care, to have an opinion and the ability to defend yourself, and to be not discriminate by religion and religion. Other than Victoria and the ACT, there is no State or Territory that has legislation for human rights, however some legislation reflects the human rights principle (AHRC, 2015). These rights are currently

Human rights are the rights that every single human being on this planet has. However, there are multiple cases all over the world where these inherent rights are being violated. The Enlightenment era of European history allowed for the beginning of the consideration of these rights. One philosopher named Mary Wollstonecraft wrote about the many violations of rights for women in society. These violations have continued to occur up to the present day. One area where this oppression is occurring is India concerning the topic of teenage marriage. India holds 12th place in the world for child marriage and although tradition is changing to allow for women to be educated and marry later, this way of thinking is not consistent in all parts of India. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everybody has “the right to marry and found a family… at full age”, yet India is home to thousands of unwanted and underage marriages. Underage marriage has many difficult repercussions, including restricted job opportunities for women. Traditions force young girls into marrying and having children very early, which creates a mental block where they can do nothing but take care of their family. This brings up the question, “to what extent is teen marriage limiting the job opportunities of women in India”? India is a very religious and traditional country where customs mean everything. Families usually marry their children to relatives for to a safe and

Human rights are almost a form of religion in today 's world. They are the great ethical yardstick that is used to measure a government 's treatment of its people. A broad consensus has emerged in the twentieth century on rhetoric that frames judgment of nations against an international moral code prescribing certain benefits and treatment for all humans simply because they are human. Within many nations political debates rage over the denial or abuse of human rights. Even in prosperous, democratic countries like Canada much public discourse is phrased in the rhetoric of rights. Legal documents to protect human rights have proliferated in Canada, culminating in the 1982 entrenchment of the Charter of Rights in the Constitution. Especially since the advent of the Charter, many Canadians have claimed that particular benefits they desire are a matter of human rights and must be provided. Indeed, the claim that the desired benefit is a human right is often meant to undercut any opposition as unprincipled or even immoral .

This essay will look at whether the existence of rights should be acknowledged by the law in all humans and whether it is only human beings who deserve the recognition of rights. I will explain the concept of rights and provide reasons on why it is imperative that the law recognises rights of human beings. I will also discuss the development of rights in nonhumans as to whether the law should recognise them.