Are human rights innate and universal?
Are human rights innate and universal?
Living Human Rights
Post WWII on the 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was espoused by the General Assembly of the United Nations in order to agree on the notion that such atrocities that occurred throughout the Great War and the Second World War would not ever be reciprocated. The document that was drawn up in less than two years by the UN and Western states, and although ambitious it would guarantee a premise for life and living for every individual all over the world. The UDHR are founded on nobility, equality and reverence, and are said to be aimed at all cultures and religions within the West and East of the globe. However there is great discrepancy regarding the justification and practicality of human rights all over the world due to political, economic and cultural differences and limitations. Universal means that ‘something’ affects, applies or is completed by everyone all over the world – there is no distinctive bias shown and equal policies are applied. Innate, in relation to human rights, means that people are given natural rights purely based on the fact that he/she is human and alive. Therefore, are human rights universal and innate or is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations an idealistic revolution that creates Western ideologies in order to govern states in their entirety?
Unfortunately, nothing can be universal in terms of treatment, beliefs and perceptions, since all values are interpreted and restricted by culture and religion. Within our modern world at present there is no universally founded culture that every person is entitled to follow or support, and therefore stemming from this main argument; no rights can be universal. Human rights have been discussed and acknowledged from the beginning of time itself, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all on in Christ Jesus”
Living Human Rights
Post WWII on the 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was espoused by the General Assembly of the United Nations in order to agree on the notion that such atrocities that occurred throughout the Great War and the Second World War would not ever be reciprocated. The document that was drawn up in less than two years by the UN and Western states, and although ambitious it would guarantee a premise for life and living for every individual all over the world. The UDHR are founded on nobility, equality and reverence, and are said to be aimed at all cultures and religions within the West and East of the globe. However there is great discrepancy regarding the justification and practicality of human rights all over the world due to political, economic and cultural differences and limitations. Universal means that ‘something’ affects, applies or is completed by everyone all over the world – there is no distinctive bias shown and equal policies are applied. Innate, in relation to human rights, means that people are given natural rights purely based on the fact that he/she is human and alive. Therefore, are human rights universal and innate or is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations an idealistic revolution that creates Western ideologies in order to govern states in their entirety?
Unfortunately, nothing can be universal in terms of treatment, beliefs and perceptions, since all values are interpreted and restricted by culture and religion. Within our modern world at present there is no universally founded culture that every person is entitled to follow or support, and therefore stemming from this main argument; no rights can be universal. Human rights have been discussed and acknowledged from the beginning of time itself, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all on in Christ Jesus”