The Pros And Cons Of Universal Declaration Of Human Rights

Human rights were initiated for the protection of the basic civil and political liberties in the general public. In the United Kingdom the Human Rights Act of 1998 came into force in October 2000. The aim of the HRA in the UK was to provide further legal effect to the basic rights and freedoms contained in the European Convention of Human Rights. The rights contained in the HRA not only affect essential matters of life and death, but also issues that occur in people's daily life. Considering the broad range of basic rights covered, it is not astonishing that the HRA is viewed as one of the most significant segments of legislation ever passed in the UK.

Imagine a dog who is ill and suffering, they don’t speak nor do they voice their opinions yet you can tell that there in a world of pain and misery. You decide to put them down, put them at rest; knowing their not in pain and suffering. How can this be justified when a person who is terminally ill can’t make the decision on how they end their life. Through countless surgeries, chemotherapy and many vital medical treatments that were vital once in their life, that can now no longer be beneficial, a person cannot simply decide his or her fate.

People no matter what race, gender, ethnicity, or religion should be able to immigrate to a country to seek freedom and justice. People immigrate from all different places around the world to escape suffering or torment from countries in which they lived. In this past 2016 election there has been a major shift on the lives of immigrants as they try to enter the United States of America. President Donald Trump has ordered an immigration ban which bars immigrants for 90 days from entering the United States from seven predominantly Muslim countries which includes Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Even more strikingly, it also bans all refugees for 120 days, and Syrian refugees indefinitely. Even though the president is supposedly attempting to suppress terror within the U.S, he is targeting people from distinct religious groups, an action that has deemed truly unjust within our Constitution. In doing so, he is separating innocent families, banning students from re-entering their university, and preventing helpless children begin a new life in a seemingly free country.

At the core of society are the undeniable rights we are afforded as human beings. These rights are outlined in the United Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) as a way to protect each individual’s freedoms. Since its adoption sixty-seven years ago, society and its viewpoints have changed drastically (“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”). Therefore, while at the time the intentions for this document might have been genuine to protect all people, they are no longer sufficient. The lack of inclusion in this document has led to the creation of documents such as the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

Throughout the evolution of history in the United States many of our ancestors made it a priority to fight for their rights and the rights of future generations to come. Blood, sweat, and tears were poured out just to have the ability to speak their mind without being punished, to gain respect for themselves as human being, and so much more. It is thought by many that by gaining these rights in society the world will be a better place, in many ways that is true, but on a global scale there are several reasons why that may not be the case. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was created to set a generalized form of human rights to all people in the word and is respected by many but unfortunately many countries fail to recognize it simply because of their beliefs and rulings.

The concept that morals are not inherent or universal but are developed by the necessities of a given society at any certain time, as presented in William Graham Sumner’s Folkways, is inadequate and displeasing. While some moral practices are relative to particular cultures, that does not mean that there are no rights that belong to everyone, nor does it mean that just because an activity is practiced that it is morally justifiable. Each human being is entitled to a certain set of liberties, which are outlined in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” All individuals are supposed to have equal access to these rights, but according to Sumner, all rights are cultural and none are universal.

In accordance with article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, created in 1948, American citizens are entitled to, "the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and wellbeing of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services..." (Universal Declaration of Human Rights). This declaration also goes on to give a special mention to mothers and children, and their need for additional assistance. With this in mind, states commonly have many health policies to protect these human rights described in the above declaration. However, some states go against this declaration by restricting access to certain health services, namely abortion, on the basis of moral, political, or religious objection. In the following pages the topic of reproductive rights will be broached, and the associated cases that are centered on both sides of the issue will be discussed.

The mistreatment of women in the Middle East desecrates the human rights Americans claim all should have. In the second article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” 203 countries around the world recognize the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and are apart of the United Nations organization itself, if 203 countries agree to govern and provide the rights the Declaration states, then why must women in certain regions receive permission

In 2013, the parents of an Amish girl with leukemia decided to refuse further chemotherapy for her and rely on “natural remedies” instead. The state of Ohio responded by taking the family to court to attempt to force the girl into chemotherapy, which they argued was necessary to save her life. The court ruled in favor of the government, and in response the family fled the country, arguing that the treatment violated their cultural and religious norms, and there was no assurance that it would be effective. This case brings up several complicated issues of human rights that implicate principles from the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Declaration of the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, Convention on the Rights of a Child, Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The situation of the Ohio Amish family spotlights a potential for conflict between the principles of protecting religious and cultural minorities, allowing for freedom of belief and autonomy over one’s own body, and the rights of a child to both her own religion and culture and to access the same standard of healthcare available to others in her country. In this particular situation, resolving the conflict is a matter of life and death: is it more important to be surrounded by one’s own culture and religion, or to have potentially life saving health care treatment? While I

that everyone is equal and should be treated the same. Not one person is better than another, and

General Assembly of the United Nations implemented The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, following the end of World War II and it was created after the formation of the United Nations in 1945 (Moscrop, 2014). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights consist of code of conduct and international laws came to life following the recent two world wars, genocide, violence and social inequality (Welch, 2015), and are meant to provide an international bill of rights to all humans. Welch (2015) notes the drafting of the Declaration took 2 years, 168 amendments and over 1400 votes and has been translated into 337 languages and the components of the Declaration are equality,

The “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” was created, after the Holocaust, in 1948. The terrible unfair treatment that occurred, during the Holocaust, most likely helped to create many of the articles in the “Universal Declaration of Human RIghts.” Articles such as, Article 2 Article 3, Article 5, and Article 12 are some of the articles that would have been violated during the time of the Holocaust.

The United Declaration of Human Rights is an international document where the United Nation (1948) put together to commit to uphold, promote and protect the human rights of every individual. The united Nation proclaims that the UDHR has a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. There are various ways that the United States can enhance its implementation of rights to our education system, media, and the workplace.

Thursday, December 10, marks the 67th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations General Assembly, which recognized that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

For decades, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been used as an overall basis for the rights every human is enabled to, no matter their differences. Without a doubt, there are several countries that violate this declaration and have no respect for their citizens’ rights. Many may agree that Pakistan is among the numerous countries that don’t take the steps to make sure that every man and woman is enabled to these rights. In recent years, Pakistan has discriminated against their own citizens, whether it be because of their religion, gender, or even caste, which violated Article 2 of the declaration. In addition, Article 16, or the right of someone to marry who they please and have the right to raise a family has also been violated thousands of times, whether it be by the government, a citizen’s village, or even his/hers own family. The right to have good working conditions and pay, which is Article 23, has also been violated by Pakistan, as many adults and children alike have faced work brutality. As a result of these numerous violations, it is clear that Pakistan does not follow Articles 2,16, and 23, and therefore this country violates the Declaration of Human Rights.