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

I fear the phrase may have become so cliché. I wonder if people really realise the implications of using it without any legal reference?

2007-12-05 08:59:06 · 13 answers · asked by Mr. T 2 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

13 answers

It is a phrase that is often identified with anything that is morally justifiable. However, in all cases, the phrase only has any real meaning in reference to a particular law. For example, the statement, 'You have the right to live' is meaningless without any reference to whom it is that provides this Right. Such statements implicitly assume the existence of God and as such are making a reference to God's law. To be consistent, from an atheist's point of view the concept of a Right should truly be meaningless to them unless it referred to legal right.
On a similar note there is a certain contradiction inherent in the idea of everyone having the moral right of free speech. Since anyone speaking out against religious ideals is also considered immoral.

2007-12-05 09:16:19 · answer #1 · answered by s 2 · 0 0

A human right is a right that belongs justifiably to every person. What? That's a big fat DUH! Yeah, I know that my definition is just about as bland and generic as it can get. But what do you expect? The fact is, when you get down to human rights, you are talking about something that is absolute...as in a right that is basic to all people without question. But who gets to decide what those rights would be specifically?

But you asked how I define it. And I can only give a generic answer, because any specific definition can be subjective.

So once again, a human right is a right that belongs justifiably to every person. This is supposed to be absolute for every person, but we humans can't seem to agree what these rights might be.

2007-12-05 17:18:54 · answer #2 · answered by Starmark 4 · 0 0

People in prison have any amount of human rights - i use the phrase with legal reference. This is because there are several hundred organisations wanting to represent prisoners and their grievances in court to exploit the legal aid system (solicitors are in a no lose position - they get paid handsomely whatever the outcome) and it cheaper to give in than fight through the courts.
Interestingly there are only three bodies wanting to represent victims of crime.

2007-12-05 18:24:15 · answer #3 · answered by bri 7 · 0 0

It is the right of human beings to pursue a course of life to their choosing so long as that choice does not conflict with or prevent another Human from doing the same.

2007-12-05 17:20:17 · answer #4 · answered by Gee Whizdom™ 5 · 2 0

Check with the United Nations

2007-12-05 17:06:44 · answer #5 · answered by timberline06450 3 · 1 0

By human responsibilities!

2007-12-05 21:56:38 · answer #6 · answered by Sly Fox [King of Fools] 6 · 0 0

Human rights are defined by humans. I think it is the right to believe what you want, and the willingness to die for that right. All 'rights' have to be purchased through blood, effort, and reason.

2007-12-05 17:26:25 · answer #7 · answered by jelesais2000 7 · 0 1

human rights means,if your from Pakistan,India,or from the middle east you can do what you dam well like,it also means if you break the law your jailers will get you whatever you want also if your a law,hard working citizen you have no rights at all,so in a word or too,scrap the bloody thing

2007-12-05 17:10:09 · answer #8 · answered by driver3260 1 · 1 1

fundamental principle of rights:
with rights comes responsibilities.

don't forget that. too many people living off the fat of society without actually giving anything back.

2007-12-06 15:34:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Human rights are rights that we should have because we're human.

2007-12-05 21:23:29 · answer #10 · answered by Reflected Life 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers