How is protecting human life more important than protecting human rights?

Question

it's for debate, and i'm saying it's okay to use extreme measures in criminal interrogations as long as we're promoting safety/protecting life in the long run.

Answer 1

I think you mean human life versus human liberty, as life is a human right. Liberty, defined as freedom to do as one wills, is not unlimited, particularly when what one wills threatens human life. Therefore, it seems that human life will win out over human liberty whenever the two are in conflict.

Answer 2

well I would argue that the right to your own life is the most basic and important right. If someone elses right to free speach or right to own a gun, violate your own right to life then I would have to say that makes it more important.

Now in the case of torture or abortion or something like that, you can't and never will prove that torturing someone will directly or even indirectly save a human life therefore it should never be allowed. And unfortunately there is some debate over whether a fetus is actually human life so....

I think it boils down to, what's the point in having human rights if there are no humans to enjoy them. If you absolutely must disregard human right in order to protect the lives of humans then you have to do it.

Answer 3

by preserving a life you are not only protecting the rights but you get the benefits of other things in life. it's alright to use extreme measures in criminal interrogations because u r looking at the big picture (magnitude, etc.). i'm sorry, my brain's sorta dead right now 'cause i'm tired. some of my friends r in debate too. hope this helps, but it prbly didn't. can u just ask a coach to help u right a block?
good luck.

Answer 4

Hey Eleni! Your question is the most interesting I've read so far. I would say that protecting human rights is more important since I
see more people are dying from human rights violation than from human life being unprotected, right?

Answer 5

It is not. The concern about human life is limitted usually to only the biological functions, not much else. In fact, there have been cases where people were slowly tortured to near-death and then revived just so they can be tortured some more. Clearly, this is an example that human life does NOT trump human rights.

Answer 6

who says we have either in the world today? Question every motive they could have for what they do. They are slowly removing every right you have as a human being.


also "human rights" is a fake word. The strong will always do what they want with the weak. The smart will always control the dumb. Humans do not have any rights. I agree that they should. I would like for them to have right, being human myself. But honestly, today in the USA you can be thrown in jail for life without trail under the patriot act with no charges against you. Is this what you call human rights?

Answer 7

Say what? Human rights Right Number One is: Right to life.

Answer 8

Will the extreme measures result in the loss of a life. You cannot preach for human rights and then take them away from another whether or not they share our views on human rights.

Answer 9

Why look for such a complicated answer in a stupid forum-ish website?

Human rights are above all no matter what. Extreme situations do not mean taking torture and that into account. There is a drug that does its job way better then torture or shock therapy can do to anyone, its not necessary. Plus, when that line is crossed, it just brings more problems of how far should we go?

Answer 10

Human life is mostly hubris, human rights are social contracts. Fictions of fevered brows stuck on a veil of confusion.