The Inherent Rights of Human Beings Essay

Cohen defines rights as “a claim that one party may exercise against another”(339). He explains that there are many different types of rights: some moral, some legal; some held by a single person, others held by groups; all differing in what the right entitles one to. Above all this, however, Cohen stresses that rights are a concept rooted in morality. They arise out of the necessity for self-governance among a community, providing standards of conduct that beget personal protection and safety. Therefore, the argument continues that the holders of rights must only be those who are capable of comprehending such concepts as morality and duty and right against wrong. After all, standards can only be held to subjects capable of understanding and achieving them. Because humans are the only

Natural Rights: The idea that all people are born with the same, equal rights, such as life, liberty, and property. Thomas Jefferson was a key person in spreading the idea.

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.

These rights are said to be inscribed in the hearts of all men (Seagrave 2011). Natural law is God’s law that every man can know.

The shared passion of visionaries, thinkers, and writers profoundly influence society in the modern world and hold in their hands the ability to craft a better future. They inspire new ,, and sometimes even revolution. Two documents of the 18th century, The Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of Rights of man established and angle for which we view human rights, liberties, and human freedoms. While the underlying motivations of the declarations each have a distinct purpose, the intent to establish universal human rights parallel and often mimic one another in language and meaning. Both documents however have interesting contradictions and inconsistences with regards to whom the liberties should apply, from whom the authority is derived and the motivations behind the drafting of each respective declaration.

Can a person’s natural rights be took away from them? Some say no, but it is evident throughout history that they can be. One of the most horrific examples of human right’s be taken away is the extermination of Jews in the Holocaust. In the Declaration of Human Rights, the twenty-fifth article states, Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family. This right was violated a exuberant amount of times during the Holocaust. In Elie Wiesel’s award winning book, Night, Elie explains how he was dehumanized, stripped of his rights, and gives evidence to why humans deserve to have rights.

However, although their rights were recognised starting from 1900s, some argue that it is insufficient as Australia does not has a ‘Bill of Rights’ and the Constitution is not a document which focus on human rights (Bailey 2008; Owen 2010). Despites of the claims, there is no need for the Australian government to have a ‘Bill of Right’ as the third element of Rule of Law already ensures the protection of human rights and natural justice. Plus, having a ‘Bill of Rights’ means that it will be likely subjected to High Court’s interpretation and will not guarantee protection of human rights.

What is a Right? Is it an inalienable individual moral or legal code, a fundamentally collective moral or legal code, or could it be, that a right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others and, as such, doesn’t it carry the concept that by doing so you may not infringe on another’s sovereignty? These questions reflect the conflict societies; in current years, face in respects to Human Rights. This is not to say, that societies are not able to overcome these issues, and that civilisations; current and ancient, have produced documents that have defied the impression that human rights are a new entity.

Authors, Tremblay, Kelly, Lipson, and Mayer (2008, p. 86) state that “Natural law refers to a body of universal laws, which is applicable to all human beings and regulates our interactions.” Natural law claims that some rights we have is because of the decency in our human nature which is passed on to us by God, and we can use human reasoning to comprehend that concept. Furthermore, natural law insists that law should be dependent on religion and morality and humans should be able to differentiate between good and evil. Theorists believed that human rights should not be defined by an authority figure such as the government, but instead, by ethics, because they assumed that human morality comes from nature. According to Aquinas, violation of human being morals “were considered contrary to the law of nature and the will of God” (Tremblay et al., 2008, p. 87). Furthermore, the

The Declaration of the Rights of man and Citizen is a document of French constitutional history. This declaration listed the rights of an individual, which guaranteed the rights of ¨liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression”. These are the supposed rights of human nature. The purpose of the government, in this document, was to preserve these rights. The document also declared the sovereignty of the people and equality of men and includes the concept of natural rights and the social contract. It is organized into seventeen articles that state each right of man. It is said in the passage that the document greatly corresponds to the American Declaration of Independence. It also includes

One of the main reasons why human rights have been put in place is to protect the public life and public space of every individual being. One fundamental characteristic of human rights is that they are equal rights; they are aimed at providing protection to every person in an equal way. These rights have been entrenched through laws that are passed by states and international conventions. Human rights laws have evolved over time, and have been shaped by several factors, including philosophical theories in the past. This paper looks at the theories of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills, and how their teachings can be used to explain the sources of human rights. Kant’s moral philosophy is very direct in its

today we call them human rights" (McShea 34). The issue of whether or not to

The doctrine of human rights were created to protect every single human regardless of race, gender, sex, nationality, sexual orientation and other differences. It is based on human dignity and the belief that no one has the right to take this away from another human being. The doctrine states that every ‘man’ has inalienable rights of equality, but is this true? Are human rights universal? Whether human rights are universal has been debated for decades. There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background

In order to fully answer the question we must be able to fully define rights and discover how they relate and help democracy. Rights can be broken down into a number of sub categories and in this essay we will discuss the meaning of Civil and political rights but first and fore most “rights” are a number of civil, juridical and ethical rights of entitlement or liberty and are a set of regulating rules that allow people entitlement or to be owed to them. Rights are fundamental to many disciplines such as law and ethics. Civil and political rights are a branch of rights in which we will discuss, Civil and political rights are used to

“All human beings are 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.” These opening words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights express a concept of man which underpins the framework of human rights embodied in the Universal Declaration and the two international covenants of Human Rights. Western political traditions is a concept that it derives from, is in harmony with moral and social teachings to be found in many other traditions and patterns of belief.