Essay on Human Rights, War and Terrorism

“Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, and housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control” (United Nations Declaration of Human Rights).The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights immediately brought about a change to the world as a whole. Not only did they decide it inhuman to keep health care from citizens, but they set out other standards of

Security measures drastically increased after 9/11. 9/11 was an act of terrorism that would change the way the country handled privacy. Americans needed to voice their opinions after this happened and have their own rights protected. The need to protect individual rights is the utmost important aspect in a thriving U.S. society.

Human rights are essential for all people, despite their nationality, gender, ethnic origin, color, or religion. Everyone is entitled to these rights without being discriminated against. For a long time, people were being denied these basic rights as they were being abused and tortured for things that they couldn’t control. People were tired of getting caught in the cross-fire, they wanted protection, a chance and the freedom to live. Although there was a lack of human rights before World War II, human rights have significantly improved over the post-war period, and officials are putting forth efforts to ensure that human rights are protected in modern-day society.

1. “ Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control” (United Nations, 2012).

Health Priorities in Australia- Professional Report Assessment Task By Chloe Hodgkinson Part 1 Provide arguments as to why health promotion should be based on: i. Individuals, communities and governments. (To support your example please provide examples) Health promotion is defined as ‘the process of enabling people to increase their control over, and to improve their health’.

the human rights of every individual must be acknowledged and the basic human needs of every individual and family must be met. There must also be a peaceful

Perhaps one of the most notable examples of violated civil liberties in the fight to thwart terrorism has been prolonged detention of suspects by the United States government without a charged crime or access to legal counsel. With the passage of the PATRIOT Act, there have been numerous cases of where individuals have been arrested and detained by the government without even charging them for a crime. Such actions are in clear violation of the Sixth Amendment which guarantees “the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you” (US. Const. amend. VI). The matter was brought into the national spotlight with the arrests of Jose Padilla, who was arrested for allegedly conspiring with Al Qaeda to set off a bomb in the United States. After Padilla was arrested, for 16 months he was not “charged with a crime, nor given access to his lawyers” (Jost 1). Padilla was able

P1: EXPLAIN THE CONCEPTS OF EQUALITY, DIVERSITY AND RIGHTS IN RELATION TO HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE. EQUALITY: equality is basically about the equal rights, status or opportunities being given to those who are using health and social care services. However, when talking about equality in health and social care settings, those who are using the services are accepted to be treated equally and policies has being put in place to make sure that individuals are treated fairly in health and social care sectors. DIVERSITY: this is basically about accepting and respecting different people from diverse society to access health and social care services.

There are two type of human rights: those that are intrinsic, ones that we would still hold if there were no structured society or laws (for example, the right to adequate food), and those that are socially and politically constructed, meaning rights that exist because of conversation, agreements, ordinances, and laws (for example, healthcare) (Taylor, 2010). It would be hard to make an argument for health care as an intrinsic right but I would, and will in the next part of this paper, argue for healthcare as a political right. The General Assembly of the United Nations presented this exact argument when it included access to healthcare on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including healthcare as an inalienable right that should be provided to the people (Assembly, 1948). Despite its inclusion on this document though, the United States is among a minority of wealthy nations that do not provide health care to its people. We as citizens of the United States must come to determine what “counts among [us] as just and unjust” (Rawls, 1971, p. 11) and what “is rational for [us] to pursue” (Rawls, 1971, p. 11) as a nation and what we view as rights for our people. Shafer-Landau suggests several constraints of thinking that are important in this

“The danger that darkened the United States of America and the civilized world on September 11, did not pass with the atrocities committed that day”. (Ashcroft, 2003) The terrors of 9/11 caused increased security that comes at a cost that many feel is an invasion of their charter rights. The idea of racial profiling is not new, but many feel worse than ever in today’s anti-Muslim society. This habit of losing civil liberties in the wake of terror is to some an unnecessary change that is unallowable, but leaves many wondering if we should sacrifice our freedom for safety.

Ever since the beginning of the terrorist attacks on American soil, the War on Terror has been involved in the lives of Americans and nations near us. The War on Terror’s background originated through conflicts between warring countries in the Middle East; U.S. involvement started when a terrorist guided plane crashed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 in New York City. The attack was suspected to be the work of the middle-eastern terrorist group Al-Qaeda. The U.S. military, under the leadership of then commander-in-chief George W. Bush, declared a “War on Terror” on the terrorist group and the fighting began.

The Global War on Terror is a military campaign led by the United States and the United Kingdom and supported by other NATO members. It was originally against al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them. This paper discusses how the Bush Administration handled the War on Terror as well as different aspects of it, including its terminology, its objectives, its military operations and criticism against it.

War Against Terror and Human Rights The Human Rights Act 1998 took full legal effect across the English and Welsh legal systems on October 2nd 1998. The Act, allows people to claim a number of the rights and freedoms that are set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Government had high hopes that when the act was passed it would create a 'Culture of Human Rights within the United Kingdom.'

The immediacy and the primacy of any truly potent force is the ability to perpetuate itself. Sharp and energetic outbursts have their place, and can be known to have great effect-cataclysmic forces, despite their maximum destructive potential, are temporary in their total effects in relation to some absolute goal. In other words, they are generally limited in scope, and well defined in purpose; there is a tactical objective, which is usually consummated quickly. The more dreaded force creeps along, escalating incrementally, and while it may abide a strategic goal, or even a policy, it is generally open-ended. This sort of ambiguity I am referring to differs from the flexible tactical necessity in that strategic outcomes are very much

Purpose: To inform readers of the effects the recent terrorist attacks have on society today.