English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

according to some law editors,what is equality before the law.

2006-08-25 06:05:18 · 6 answers · asked by Prince A 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

6 answers

There are no fundamental human rights accepted by all religions and all countries, except the right to live.

And even that doesn't guarantee any particular quality of life. And certainly not any equality of life.

2006-08-25 06:10:35 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0 1

We'd have to come to a consensus as to what rights all humans are entitled to. Is it free cable? Is it free press? Is it women being able to work? Is it women being able to wear bikinis? Is it free education? Is it free religion? Is it running water? Healthcare?

We'd also have to understand that some people have no problems being what we view as repressed. It's very ethnocentric of us to go into an Arab country and tell women they are stupid for covering their heads. If they feel they are respecting their god that way, who are we to tell them it's wrong?

We'd also have to have a counsel enforce those rights. I can say with certainty that certain people in the US wont want Kofi Annan coming in and saying that we need to provide more benefits to the homeless, take care of our veterans for life, separate media moguls from party lines, provide healthcare for EVERY citizen, and 'tithe' a percentage to the UN to support the watchdog program.

To paraphrase an ancient text worshiped by many, are we our brother's keeper? And then from there, will we hold our own land to the same standards? And what happens if we don't? Sanctions? Fines? UN Jail? Jail for who? The president? Congress?

2006-08-25 13:17:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This is a tough one because perservation of defined fundamental human rights need recognition by individual states. This is one of the major obstacles in attempting to impose a universal standard. The fundamental right to life for example, is deemd to be the most sanctimoonius right, yet we still have "kangaroo courts" and "detention without trial for treason/sedetion charges" in many countries. Penalty of which is usually death in the worst cases.

2006-08-25 14:50:02 · answer #3 · answered by boston857 5 · 0 0

I think that it should be left to the UN. But, my country needs to keep to itself for a mighty while. Plus, there needs to be a consensus with the world leader's about these things.

2006-08-25 13:10:05 · answer #4 · answered by longbeachcutie218 1 · 0 0

All we can do is guarantee them in our own country. That's it, end of story. Otherwise, you get fruitcake organizations like the UN sticking it's nose into everyone's business. The UN SUCKS.

Love, Jack.

2006-08-25 13:11:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

By US not poking their nose in some ones elses biz

2006-08-25 13:07:22 · answer #6 · answered by Dr M 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers