In the minds of many people human rights are defined as a set of governmental Do’s and Don’ts that protect people from their governments in terms of the freedom of speech, assembly, etc. without infringement. Of course, most people would agree that these are fundamental rights and deserve to be upheld, however many feel that there are a set of universal human rights that can be used to secure the freedom of all people around the world. One such document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights written by the United Nations, claims to be the “common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations”. While I agree with most of the points made in the declaration, I simply do not believe that the human race is homogenous enough for a …show more content…
There really is not much interpersonal violence in Iran (in other words, apart from the governmental abuses) and the people there would consider the right to bear arms in a society full of murder to be a human rights violation. I have learned (in my opinion) that there is no clear-cut way to approach human rights for everyone. The schism between different cultures will never allow for everyone to see eye-to-eye on every opinion, which is my main grievance with the Universal Declaration for Human Rights.
The document is intended to cover all people regardless of their governments, but then directly contradicts itself in numerous articles. First of all, the United Nations is not a democratic organization itself; the concept of “equal and inalienable rights” coming from an organization in which some members have a higher precedent of voting seems fallacious. The article says that people are entitled to the rights listed regardless of “political… national or social” origins, but many articles contradict this basis. Article 5-7 deals with freedom from cruel and unusual punishment along with justice before the eyes of the law, however that is not possible with every government. A fascist government will commit acts of cruel punishment through their political ideology. This goes back to my main gripe that you cannot say that these rights should be
“Ideas about human rights have evolved over many centuries. But they achieved strong international support following the Holocaust and World War II. To protect future generations from a repeat of these horrors, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and invited states to sign and ratify it”
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, categories all human beings as free. Article one identify all human beings as born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article two states, Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust,
Sadly, human rights and the issues connected to it are often disregarded as something that is less important, especially when compared to issues such as arms proliferation or territorial integrity or the strategic interests of a state. That is to say, not that these issues are not critically important as well. However, the world would be a much better place if in dealing with each other and accommodating
Human rights can be summarized as the activities and freedoms that all human beings are entitled to enjoy and only by virtue of their humanity. These conditions are generally guaranteed in the constitution of the land. They are widely felt in the area as they are divided and not limited to political, social economic and cultural rights. Some of the main principles of human rights include the fact that they are inherent, inalienable and indivisible as well. In this relation, human rights can never be taken away from an individual whereby the enjoyment of one right should not infringe the enjoyment of other. They must all be respected and maintained.
Human rights as stated in the universal declaration of human rights is that every human is born with equal rights no matter what sex, age, race or sexuality they are. It also means every person is protected by and under this law no matter what.
The concept of the universal declaration of human rights is to give everyone equal rights and to take away single incidents or “accidents”. The value of people’s views keep peace and justice in the world. The quote “whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of justice and peace in the world” (UN Commission 1-3). The text also explains how the man is inclined to the right of other men and the ability to provide justice does not require
On a global political stand point there was a uniting of ideas and governments; what we know today as the United Nations (UN). One of the main ideas which the UN has grown up around is ‘The individual possess rights simply by virtue of being Human’ (The Universal Declaration of human rights); which was adopted by the general assembly in 10th December 1948. This statement is reflect in the core principles
It was “solemnly” proclaimed that “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UNDHR] states a common understanding of the peoples of the world concerning the inalienable and inviolable rights of all members of the human family and constitutes an obligation for the members of the international community” . The UNDHR gave value to the term ‘human rights’, stressing the value of human dignity. However, the article also recognises the need for social order, Article 29 acknowledges that limits to these rights must be determined by law and can only be for the purposes of securing recognition and respect of others and to meet “the just requirements of morality, public order, and the general welfare in a democratic society”. Any restriction on these rights has to be justified as proportionate to the aims pursued by the restriction, for example, a police officer is justified in wielding a firearm against an individual deemed to be putting other lives in
The United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights was commissioned in December 1948 by the UN General Assembly in an attempt to create a standard which is common to all people regardless of “race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion or any other status”. It is the United Nations responsibility to ensure that the participating countries follow these articles set forth by the assembly and to ensure that these rights are not being desecrated. The term "Human Rights" is best described by the United Nations as "Human rights are the rights to be born free, the right to life, the right to equality, the right to freedom, the right to assembly and the right to own property which is inherent to all human beings”. However, this statute by the
The dictionary defines the term ‘Human Rights’ as “fundamental rights, especially those believed to belong to an individual and in whose exercise a government may not interfere. (Dictionary)” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights laid out thirty basic human rights that all humans are entitled to. While the United Nations did try to make sure everyone was treated the same, there are still many nation-states that do not allow their citizens basic rights. Or the governments turn their heads when their citizen’s human rights are being taken from them.
However, there is an extent to how far countries can go when reinforcing their power, and the boundary is that they cannot make inhabitants unhappy because humans are protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which are fundamental rights that were adopted by the United Nations to protect human beings. Therefore, differing standards of behavior are generally not reasons to intervene except the right to privacy, rights of the child, and rights of gender equality from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are violated because the unhappy people suffering from violations of their rights must be protected against abusive
However, this is debated which I will go into more detail later on. It had the inspiration to promote friendly relations between nations and it is emphasised that all nations should cooperate. Though, this can be said to be naive as to go as far to declare that all countries abide by the Declaration and that it is universal is mistaken. What does it mean to be universal? The concept believes that human rights belong to all human being and that it is fundamental and essential to every type of society. Those who disagree that human rights are universal believe that human rights are based on your culture, it has to be understood that a right for one group maybe outright intolerable to members of another group. Human rights are being viewed as being too ‘Western’ and representing specific cultural norms and belief system of some cultures and societies rather than all. This is the cultural relativist argument, the belief that human rights cannot be applied to non-Western nations. The belief has been endorsed by many political leaders, Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew suggested that the ‘Western concepts of democracy and human rights will not work in Asia, by explaining that the West is too individualistic compared to family-orientated Asia. ‘What Asians value may not necessarily be what Americans or Europeans value? Westerners value the freedoms and liberties of the individual. As an Asian of Chinese cultural background, my values are for a government which is
Human rigths is an essential component of a tolerant and individually satisfied society. They are created to defend people’s dignity, equality and liberty. However, for thousands of years people lived with no garanteed rights, until 1948, when United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But is the Universal Declaration of Human Rigths really universal to all states and humans living in them? I am going to argue if Human Rights should or should not be unically adapted to different cultures, religions and beliefs.
The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights stands as the current gold standard for every individual’s rights. Focusing on culture, one may see that cultural rights are not clearly defined and are oftentimes in conflict with other types of rights. In this paper, I will first discuss the United Nations’ use of ‘cultural’ in its universal human rights in relation to the concept of cultural relativism. Then, using South African and American practices, such as virginity testing and discriminatory criminal justice system respectively, I will describe and analyze practices violate the UN’s universal human rights in addition to the practices’ use for the community or society as a whole. Lastly, I will compare the American Anthropological Association’s rights to culture to the UN’s universal human rights by analyzing the limitations of each.
Human right are the specific rights that are inherently instilled to all human beings regardless of their nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, language or any of feature that other may try to segment/discriminate them into a defined category. The united nations holds these rights to the utmost extent and realizes there are many countries where these rights are being infringed upon. There are international human rights laws that try to protect the people and it has been reiterated numerous times. However there is still much needed to be done to improve the status and standard of living of the people that do not have the opportunity to hold all of these rights.