Is Christianity totally compatible with Human Rights?

Answer 1

Under the Cover of Human Rights



Amnesty International, United Nations Human Rights Commission, most of the western governments, Western Media and the NGOs of the west seems to be the protectors of human rights around the world. These organizations and governments have created such a huge and complex network (human and technology) around the world that a small incident in a remote part of an under developed country can easily be traced and reported.

Local organizations in most of the countries work with them and in some cases get funding and support from these agencies. These international human rights organizations have recruited hundreds of people from the Muslim world as well.

No one can deny the value and importance of such organizations. But, are these agencies (Amnesty International, United Nations Human Rights Commission, most of the western governments, western media and NGOs truly defend the human rights of all human beings or these agencies have a very selective criterion? or these agencies want to achieve something else.

When we carefully review these agencies and their work we find that these agencies do not defend or raise their voices for all types of human rights. These agencies only report, defend and work for some very specific types of human rights. These agencies search the daily affairs of the Muslim world with microscopic eyes in order to find some thing, which apparently seems to be in conflict with the western culture and policies.

These agencies would even exploit small incidents, which helps them to project their image as the champions of human freedom. These agencies will stay quiet and normally go to hybernation when someone from the West abuses the human rights of the Muslims. But if a small incident occurs anywhere in the world in which a Muslim person can be blamed, these agencies will create huge outcry against Islam and the Muslims.

Let's review some of the examples from the recent memories. Please see whether these agencies (Amnesty International, United Nations Human Rights Commission, most of the western governments, western media and NGOs) do really care for the human rights in Muslim countries or their objectives are something else?

Selective Human Rights

During January 2001, Amnesty International, Amnesty International Canada and many other NGOs were very actively involved in the Nigerian woman, Bariya Ibrahim Magazu's case. She was sentenced by the Sharia court in Zamfara State, Nigeria, to 180 lashes for illicit sexual activity.

The Amnesty International Canada and several other NGOs were driving signature campaigns and almost daily media interviews in order to put pressure on the Canadian and the other western governments as well as on Nigerian government to save that woman's life. Thousands of emails were sent daily to create awareness about this case.

No one is disagreeing with that campaign but what surprised some of the Muslims most that at the same time hundreds of Muslim women were getting raped, tortured and sentenced to death by Russian soldiers in Chechnya everyday. Neither Amnesty International Canada nor other NGOs drove any signature campaign against Russian atrocities in Chechnya.

In fact, during January 2001 when the campaign for a woman in Nigeria was fought hard by the NGOs at the same time CBC showed a report about Chechnya. In that report some Chechan women told the reporter that they were forced to have sex with Russian soldiers in order to get the bodies of their dead family members so that they could bury them properly.

Imagine many women are forced to have sex with the killers of their family members in order to get dead bodies from those killers. For Amnesty International and the western NGOs fighting to save the life of one woman was important but saving the lives of thousands of women in Chechnya was not of that importnce.

The western NGOs including Amnesty International always accuse Muslim governments for violating the human rights when these governments try to enforce the Islamic laws (Shari'a) in their own countries. For example, in Saudi Arabia Muslim women are required to wear Hijab (head cover). In western NGOs opinion this is against the will of a women. "Muslim women in Saudi Arabia should not be required to wear Hijab".

According to the western standards, "the state has no right to interfere in a person's life". The person should be able to choose his / her life style. The Amnesty International and the NGOs will always stand up for a women if she is forced against her will to wear Hijab. But if a women is forced not to wear Hijab against her will, neither Amnesty International nor UN Human Rights Commission nor NGOs nor western media or the governments would stand up for this women.

China

Regarding human rights in China, all the human rights organizations in the West run their campaigns and create awareness about Tibet and recently, Falun Gong movement. During the recent visit of Canadian Prime Minister to China the media in Canada, the Amnesty International Canada and other NGOs ran a major campaign to create awareness about the human rights of Tibetans and Falun Gong movement.

But no media organization or NGO ever mentioned that there are more than 36 million Muslims in China who are the most oppressed community in China. Chinese Muslims suffered tremendously under the regime of Mao Zedong and his "Cultural Revolution." During the communist reign of terror, there was a violent campaign to eradicate all traces of Islam and of the ethnic identity of all non-Chinese.

The Uygur language, which had for centuries used Arabic script, was forced to adopt the Latin alphabet. The Uygurs, as with most believing Muslims, were subjected to forced labour in the some 30,000 communes set up in china.

Cambodia

When the civil war in Cambodia took place during Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge regime, millions of Cambodians were sentenced to death. Among those millions of Cambodians, thousands of Muslims were also murdered. Mosques and Islamic schools were destroyed.

Many Islamic institutions were closed. Muslims were forced to step on the Holy Qur'an and eat pig which is against their religious beliefs. Media organizations in the West little mentioned the atrocities of Cambodian Muslims.

Whenever media showed any reports of atrocities it reflected as all Cambodians as Buddhist or followers of some other religions but never a report was televised showing the genocide against the Cambodian Muslims. Amnesty International and other western NGOs never raised voice for Cambodian Muslims. Don't they think that they were human too?

Democracy Vs Diplomacy

The western governments and the NGOs are very proud to consider themselves as civilized and rest of the world .....? This civility is based upon the values and customs that The West proudly follows. The most important values of the western civilization are freedom and democracy.

But the meanings of "FREEDOM" and "DEMOCRACY" change when used by the western governments for the people of the Muslim World. For example, in Canada it is an established rule that if the 51% of the Quebecois would decide to leave Canada and become a sovereign nation the rest of the Canada will respect that decision and Canada can be divided.
Similarly, when the people of Czechoslovakia decided to breakup the country and become two independent nations - Czech and Slovakia, the entire Western world took pride in it and showed the rest of the world that it is O.K. to break up a country if the majority of the people of that country would like to do so.

Kashmir

When the similar situation arises in the Muslim world the meaning of freedom and democracy changes immediately. The word "DEMOCRACY" gets replaced by "DIPLOMACY" and the word "FREEDOM" gets replaced by "MARTYRDOM".

For example, when the people of Kashmir decided to get separated from India by using the democratic rules established and practiced by the West, the West changed the rules and asked the parties involved to use diplomacy instead of democratic rules. Instead of respecting the people's choice and freedom, the West encouraged the Indian armed forces to slaughter the freedom loving people of Kashmir.

One may say that in the West the nations in a dispute solve their problems peacefully. In case of Kashmir, India does not want to respect the voice of the majority of Kashmiris. Therefore, there is nothing what West can do. This is not a valid reason. In the past, western governments have forced the (used military and economic power) culprit governments who tried to undermine the western values.

Palestine

Why the issue of Palestine has not been resolved yet? The reason is obvious. West does not want to apply their standards of democracy and freedom towards Palestinians. Why? Because the majority of the Palestinians are Muslim and they have a dispute with Jewish community who is very dear to the west.

In fact, the western countries moved most of their Jewish population to Palestine in order to change the demographics of the region and justify the creation of the Jewish State.

All the western governments, agencies, NGOs know that there are three million Palestinian refugees in neighbouring countries waiting for the last 50 years to go back to their homeland. Why these champions of human freedom do not support and help Palestinians to go back to their own homes? They all know that if the Palestinians come back to their own homes it will again change the demographics of the region significantly. Therefore, West is reluctant to use its own democratic rules in Palestine and is trying to use diplomacy.

Bosnia Herzegovina and Kosova

It is very clear that the western governments are not sympathetic and sincere towards the Muslim world. On certain occasions it seems that the western NGOs and the governments some time try to help Muslims. But not many people understand the tricks behind that help. For example, USA and Europeans worked very hard to save the Muslims of Bosnia and Kosovo.

Many Muslims do believe that the USA and European Union were sincere towards Muslims of Bosnia and Kosovo but the truth is that the USA and European Union solved their own problems by helping Bosnian and Kosovar Muslims. The movement of independent Bosnia was started by Bosnian Muslims in order to have a Muslim government in Bosnia in which Serbs and Croats can live peacefully.

But the European Union and the USA could not tolerate such an Islamic government. The civil war was encouraged and created by those who later tried to stop it. When the civil war broke out and the Muslims from around the world started coming to Bosnia and became part were fighting for.

The movement of independent Kosova took so many lives. Is Kosova independent now? Of course, not. USA and the Europeans used the same tactics, which they had used in Bosnia Herzegovina. Europeans and the Americans waited for the situation to become worse.

Millions of Muslims became refugees; thousands of women were raped; thousands of Muslim men and young boys were slaughtered and when Muslim civilians became desperate, European Union and the USA imposed their own solution upon them. USA and European Union became the custodians of Kosova, not because they were very sympathetic towards Kosovars.

They wanted to make sure that Kosova does not become independent country and the Muslim Mujahideen from other parts of the world should not become part of Kosova's movement of independence. After scarifying thousands of lives, going through torture of concentration camps and getting destroyed the entire infrastructure of Kosova, Kosova is still not independent. Thanks to the diplomacy of the west.

Saddam and Noriega Case

When USA wanted to help Panamanian opposition parties and to save its military bases in Panama, the American armed forces went all the way to Panama City to capture the source of the problem, the President of Panama, Mr. Noriega was brought to USA to face charges for drug trafficking.

The whole issue between USA and Panama was resolved in few days. It was in the interest of USA to resolve the Noriega issue as soon as possible. American military bases were already in Panama and the trade with Panama was normal. Panama did not have any thing further to give it to the Americans. There was not much left in Panama, which Americans could have squeezed out of them. Therefore, the crises had to end soon and the removal of Noriega brought that crisis to an end.

But when the American armed forces went to the Persian Gulf with the best technology and support from other allied forces. It was in the interest of USA to keep the crises alive as long as possible. That is why they purposely left Saddam Hussein in Baghdad. If Saddam had gone from Iraq, USA would not have any justification to stay in the region. During 80s and 90s many US bases were closed in Philippines, Japan, Europe and even at home in the United States.

America was desperately looking for markets, which could feed its huge military infrastructure. USA needed military bases in order to keep its huge military in place. What could be more ideal place than Persian Gulf. The countries in the region are rich. Most of the world's oil supply comes from there.

It is very close to Israel. If help is needed in Israel, it will be a matter of minutes to reach there. The worse enemies of Americans live in the region, therefore, they can be spied upon easily. Iraq's invasion of Kuwait provided this perfect oppurtunity.

In order to provide sustainable income to the economy and military of the United States, USA kept Saddam Hussein in Baghdad purposely in order to use his government as an excuse to stay in the region as long as possible. Therefore, when American forces arrived in the Gulf they came with a long term plan to establish military bases for US armed forces in the region, to get better opportunities for US economy, to control the oil flow from there.

Pre-decided Wrestling

The war between USA and Saddam Hussein is like a pre-decided wrestling match in which both opponents have full understanding of each other's move and the outcome of the wrestling. Apparently, the both wrestlers look angry and want to defeat each other but from inside they smile and admire each other.

The big money, which comes from the pockets of the spectators, is used to pay the expenses and the prizes for both wrestlers. The spectators, who do not know that the outcome of the wrestling has already been decided, spend more and more money to buy expensive tickets. Both the wrestlers try to create as much sensation as possible in order to keep spectators preoccupied with the wrestling.

Conclusion

We can go on and discuss many examples of Western hypocrisy. But will this discussion solve the problems of Muslim Ummah? May be not.

1 . The most important thing for Muslims is to take care of themselves. Muslims must be strong (spiritually and materially) if they want respect and dignity in this world.

2 . The Muslim Ummah can become the strongest nation on this earth if they are united.

3. The unity of Muslim Ummah can only be achieved by becoming the best human beings.

4. The best human beings are those who follow (in its true sense) the word of Almighty Allah, the Glorious Qur'an and the last Messenger of Allah, Muhammad.

5. When Muslims become the best human beings through practicing Islam, it will bring Saleh (pious) governments in Muslim countries.

6. And when Muslims will have honest and Allah fearing rulers in Muslim countries, they will be strong as they were few centuries ago.

As Allah made promise to the Muslims, " Ultimately, You (the Muslims) will be victorious provided that you become true believers." (Qur'an).

By blaming USA and the Europe for the miseries of Muslims around the world is not the right thing for us to do. These agencies will never ever be sincere with Islam and Muslims. We must take charge of our destiny and start the change from our own homes, in our own countries and in our own society.

Muslims around the world cannot be strong unless they have educated each and every citizen of the Muslim world, learn science and technology, be sincere with their families and the countries and above all be the true followers of Muhammad ibn Abdullah.

Lets try to work hard to become true believers. May Allah give us the courage to adopt the path of Success, which is practicing Islam like the Family of the Prophet, and Companions of the Prophet did. Like Albairooni, Al Ghizali, Al Khuarzmi, Ibn Sina, and many other Muslim scientists who practiced what they preached. Ameen.

Answer 2

Human rights were around long before Christianity. The concepts and tenets put forth in the Bible are, for the most part, compatible, but it is the rare believer that actually follows those tenets. Christianity (and most other religions) have used their faith throughout history to commit some of the worst atrocities imaginable. Our Religious Right country has been yelled at by the UN for human rights violations lately, and they are right to chide us. When we don't follow the basic rules of human rights with regards to prisoners of war, then what does that make us? When we have such a government based on faith and the poverty problem and healthcare problem is spiralling out of control...sure, Christianity preaches tolerance, brotherhood (kind of doesn't care much about women, like most religions) and peace, but most people don't practice what they preach.

Answer 3

This depends on the perception of human rights. The 3rd Riechs Human Rights are not the same as the South African Aparthied Rights.
The Holy Roman Catholic Church Rights are not the same as the Mayan Human Rights.
The USA Human Rights is not the same as the Chinese Human Rights.
It is an Idaviduals perspective and understanding that is affected by any rights that will determine the compatabilty if there is any.
A Humanist is diametrically oppsed to a Christianist view, yet they can reach a harmony of understanding and in the doing mutually accept a right.
This is the essence of Humane Rights.



We have but the one grand journey, why waste it in death and fighting, give Peace a chance.

Answer 4

RIghts change based on the society they are being practiced by. They aren't universal because there is nothing that makes them universal. However, because humans are alike in many ways, you will see many societies adopt the same ideas of rights.

So, Christianity is perfectly compatible with the Christian idea of rights while not compatible with someone else's view of rights. Thus, if Christians are in power of a society and deciding what rights are, then they are totally compatible. If Christians aren't in power, then they aren't totally compatible.

Answer 5

Human rights originated in Christian culture, and without it they would never have existed. In Judeo-Christianity, the individual stands before God for the first time as an equal with all others.

I would ask if nonbelief can offer any foundation for human rights. The evidence of militant atheism in the 20th century suggests that it cannot.

Answer 6

Good question.

No. Neither of the three abrahamic faiths or any other religion for that matter are compatible. But the question is how do we know that human rights are "correct". Values change over time, but religion does not.

Answer 7

Unless Genesis is taken as literal history, Humans have no rights!

The link below has a number of articles on the subject.

Answer 8

there is Christianity and then their is the genuine international.. how most of the Christians supply a tithe to their church? ..I truly have attentive to 3 of the church information and you'd be shocked on the conventional that's truly given to the Christian church and it says precise interior the Bible...10% of your gross to the Church...??? nicely, my father became a treasure of our church and he suggested the only ones who gave continuously..and then it became no longer close to ten% became the retired people who's kin became grown and out on their very own and that that they had a touch added funds for his or her church... specific, some human beings supply greater then !0%...specific..yet this can be the uncommon exception. so the element is fairly few human beings persist with each and all of the guidelines..we %. and chosen what we could want to have self assurance or obey and that's ok that's what I do..yet shall we be straightforward. the Republicans and Democrats the two communicate the communicate yet they advantageous do no longer walk the walk..and specific the Christians too..as nicely as different communities that i do no longer want to get a contravention for..and that i comprehend i nonetheless ought to through fact the actuality isn't continuously prevalent....as each and every so often fact is stranger then fiction.

Answer 9

No religion is compatible with Human Rights.Every religion has its views which do not match with others.Hence the conflict sets in.That is the end of Human Rights.

Answer 10

No. For one thing, the Bible condones slavery, which is very explicitly forbidden by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

That was really the only thing that jumped outat me, but if you want to study the declaration more closely, it can be found at http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Answer 11

Human rights is a Christian concept.