Religion and Human Rights

(Q)

Encephaloid Martini
Valued Senior Member
Wikipedia has the following opening paragraph and quote on "Human Rights"


"Human rights are "basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled."[1] Examples of rights and freedoms which have come to be commonly thought of as human rights include civil and political rights, such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of expression, and equality before the law; and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to participate in culture, the right to be treated with respect and dignity, the right to food, the right to work, and the right to education in some countries.
“ All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. ”

—Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)"



The Abrahamic religions have been heavily criticized for violating human rights as defined above and usually consider their own version of human rights dictated by their gods. Many adherents to Islam, for example, consider human rights a gift from Allah.



"Sharia Law are laws that penalize non-Muslims through heavy taxation; degrade women to second class citizens; authorizes the execution of any Muslim who converts to another religion; calls for the expulsion of Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula; and implements public humiliation, torture, dismemberment, stoning to death and beheadings as forms of punishment." ~~ Mike Ramirez



It's little wonder then why the Organization of Islamic Countries championed and had pushed through on March 26, 2009 by a vote of 23-11 in the United Nations to make the defamation of religion a human rights violation.

The sheer magnitude of stupidity and hypocrisy of such a move is astounding as it demands everyone turn a blind eye to the same theocratic human rights violations Islamic practices exhibit. Welcome back to the Bronze Age.
 
We are entitled to intrinsic rights simply by our nature as human beings. You don't need a reason or explanation for that; this notion is the basic axiom of natural liberty- it's something held as a given.

And it is lamentable that some Abrahamic religions violate human rights. Or, rather, Middle Eastern culture promotes the violation of what we consider to be human rights. There are plenty of Muslims, Christians, and Jews in the Western world that conform to the Western notion of natural rights and liberty; indeed, Christianity was a major influence in the development of that idea.

The problem is that traditional Middle Eastern culture has not developed such ideas, and it causes quite the clash. The Enlightenment seems to have skipped over that region by and large; thanks a lot, Ottoman Empire. :rolleyes:
 
What is your question? Are you questioning human rights legitimacy?

I believe the question is self-explanatory- but it seems that it caught you by surprise?

Who entitled them? (Human rights that is...)

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Wikipedia has the following opening paragraph and quote on "Human Rights"


"Human rights are "basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled."[1] Examples of rights and freedoms which have come to be commonly thought of as human rights include civil and political rights, such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of expression, and equality before the law; and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to participate in culture, the right to be treated with respect and dignity, the right to food, the right to work, and the right to education in some countries.
“ All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. ”

—Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)"



The Abrahamic religions have been heavily criticized for violating human rights as defined above and usually consider their own version of human rights dictated by their gods. Many adherents to Islam, for example, consider human rights a gift from Allah.



"Sharia Law are laws that penalize non-Muslims through heavy taxation; degrade women to second class citizens; authorizes the execution of any Muslim who converts to another religion; calls for the expulsion of Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula; and implements public humiliation, torture, dismemberment, stoning to death and beheadings as forms of punishment." ~~ Mike Ramirez



It's little wonder then why the Organization of Islamic Countries championed and had pushed through on March 26, 2009 by a vote of 23-11 in the United Nations to make the defamation of religion a human rights violation.

The sheer magnitude of stupidity and hypocrisy of such a move is astounding as it demands everyone turn a blind eye to the same theocratic human rights violations Islamic practices exhibit. Welcome back to the Bronze Age.


well this is rich. you want to talk about hypocrisy, but when do you act towards others in a spirit of brotherhood? imo, you hold animosity towards, and are judgmental and condemning towards people who have different beliefs than you do. i can testify here because i have been on the receiving end of it for a while.
 
well this is rich. you want to talk about hypocrisy, but when do you act towards others in a spirit of brotherhood? imo, you hold animosity towards, and are judgmental and condemning towards people who have different beliefs than you do. i can testify here because i have been on the receiving end of it for a while.
Agreed .
I got the same problem .
:D:D .
 
I believe the question is self-explanatory- but it seems that it caught you by surprise?

Who entitled them? (Human rights that is...)

Peace be unto you ;)

agreed. i'm honestly not sure what people are missing here. rights and entitlements are deontological notions--where the hell do they come from? if one is going to assert that such exist a priori, then one has to account for it. so, let's hear it.
 
America and its Allies after W.W.II.

lol.... so they gave human rights after destroying all of them imaginable during the war?

Anyways lets cut the joke... its a serious question. Because it identifies the basic problem with the argument posed by (Q)-

Peace be unto you ;)
 
I'd like to know how the law will be implemented? The defamation of religion a human rights violation? So this means Xian and Muslims must NOT teach that polytheism is wrong? I mean, they can't really condemn polytheism without defaming some Hindu and Shinto. I wondering how it's possible to persecute people who convert from Islam to Scientology and adhere to this law?
\
 
I'd like to know how the law will be implemented? The defamation of religion a human rights violation? So this means Xian and Muslims must NOT teach that polytheism is wrong? I mean, they can't really condemn polytheism without defaming some Hindu and Shinto. I wondering how it's possible to persecute people who convert from Islam to Scientology and adhere to this law?
\
Hey, I like this point, Michael!!!
 
I'd like to know how the law will be implemented? The defamation of religion a human rights violation? So this means Xian and Muslims must NOT teach that polytheism is wrong? I mean, they can't really condemn polytheism without defaming some Hindu and Shinto. I wondering how it's possible to persecute people who convert from Islam to Scientology and adhere to this law?
\

Can you first answer "Who entitled Human rights?".... otherwise anything that comes from this concept is quite meaningless.

Peace be unto you ;)
 
The victors always determine the law, which not ironically turns out to be in their favor.

And so there is no reason to assume that 'human rights' are some 'ultimate laws' that need not be violated or for that matter even hold any meaning.

If Human Rights are a creation of humans then any other system created by humans also deserves to be called Human Rights leading to this whole argument as a non-argument at best.

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Can you first answer "Who entitled Human rights?".... otherwise anything that comes from this concept is quite meaningless.

Peace be unto you ;)
No, I think he is on fair ground. If people are asserting a general rule for humanity, they need to be prepared to follow that rule themselves. Abrahamic religions have a poor history in relation to other religions including pagan and indigenous ones. The heathens and infidels must also be treated well, according to their own formulation. While the OP needs to address your issue and I support you their, Michael is pointing out a potential area hypocrisy, and he need not take a stand on where the rights are coming from.
 
No, I think he is on fair ground. If people are asserting a general rule for humanity, they need to be prepared to follow that rule themselves. Abrahamic religions have a poor history in relation to other religions including pagan and indigenous ones. The heathens and infidels must also be treated well, according to their own formulation. While the OP needs to address your issue and I support you their, Michael is pointing out a potential area hypocrisy, and he need not take a stand on where the rights are coming from.

Hypocrisy or exception? In order to figure this out you must know where the laws are coming from

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Who 'entitled' them?

Peace be unto you ;)

Are you really suggesting that because you think God gave people human rights that it is okay to violate them in gods name?

I really hope that's not where you are heading with this. It's like a whole new level of wtf.
 
Are you really suggesting that because you think God gave people human rights that it is okay to violate them in gods name?

I really hope that's not where you are heading with this. It's like a whole new level of wtf.

No... why would I be talking about God when I know (Q) certainly doesn't believe in one...

My question is quite simple-

Who entitled them?

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Back
Top