Religion and Human Rights
- Thread starter (Q)
- Start date
So you're now retreating to the argument that God created everything. Even say he did create them, he only wants you to follow what he told you to follow.
Peace be unto you
That depends on what people believe... If you don't believe in God then why would you turn to them? If one does believe in God then that would be the more logical place to go for human rights because the 'benefit' can be determined best by God as it would deal with all of eternity and on top God is All-Knowing and All-Wise- much better characteristics than us?
Anyways this is apart from current threads argument... The argument has been sufficiently discredited and I feel no need to continue your sarcastic question and answer session.
Peace be unto you
hmmm.....
I have not read about or come across any concept of god that is perfect
In other words the only 'human rights' are those created by them... I beg to disagree. Other systems also have assigned human rights. For your assertion that, that is what Human Rights are after claiming that Human rights are for the benefit of humans is stupid. Because these 'human rights' are only looking for the 'benefit' for this world while other systems have developed rights that will benefit for eternity. Choice of which is dependent on the person who has what belief.
I don't understand why this is so hard to swallow.
Peace be unto you
So basically you are saying it is good to violate human rights which humans have decided benefit humanity, in order to make a magical sky fairy happy? And that making a magical sky fairy happy will benefit humanity in eternity.
So it's okay to murder people for the sky fairy, if it makes him happy because the sky fairy will reward you for all eternity for violating the human rights of others.
So you're now retreating to the argument that God created everything. Even say he did create them, he only wants you to follow what he told you to follow.
Peace be unto you
I'm not arguing.
Any human who wouldn't stand on Human Rights while before God doesn't get any respect. The thought is foolish ass kisser.
Well it seems the discussion has become what you believe and what I believe.... which actually exemplifies my argument...
I think I've shown that the initial OP argument is nonsense so I have no reason repeat myself to you.
You seem to think that "human rights" is some separate, self-composed entity... when asked how it came about you say we created it for our benefit... then responded to how do you know it is benefiting compared to something else like religious laws you go back to the assertion that human rights are something self-composed and not following them is like being a prick.... I have no reason to continue this circular nonsense with you guys.
Peace be unto you
I think I've shown that the initial OP argument is nonsense so I have no reason repeat myself to you.
You seem to think that "human rights" is some separate, self-composed entity... when asked how it came about you say we created it for our benefit... then responded to how do you know it is benefiting compared to something else like religious laws you go back to the assertion that human rights are something self-composed and not following them is like being a prick.... I have no reason to continue this circular nonsense with you guys.
Peace be unto you
So that is like your bible? You mind listing down the Human Rights like Ten Commandments, for ease of reference?
Peace be unto you
I'm assuming the Citizens of those countries that proposed the law - at the very least. Considering it was mainly a coalition of Islamic States that pushed for the law to be passed - I eagerly look forward to the first law suites filed by people who want to leave Islam.Can you first answer "Who entitled Human rights?".... otherwise anything that comes from this concept is quite meaningless.
Peace be unto you
As a matter of fact, it may be that Mosques in the USA or UK, if they preach intolerance of other faiths, such as Shinto, Hindu or even Arab Polytheism, may be in violation of their own law? Do you know how MANY 100s of millions of Muslims have been exposed to antisemitic ideas from the teachings within their Mosque?
Pretty interesting to see how this law is applied.
So that is like your bible? You mind listing down the Human Rights like Ten Commandments, for ease of reference?
Peace be unto you
Humans Rights are established for humans and not for religion.
Read them for yourself it's quite a long document. Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In post #37 I gave you this rundown concering - "Human Rights are the "basic rights and freedoms" geared up and in place to be of benefit to every human. These rights are 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".
Last edited:
The idea of "Human Rights" was and is a human creation. You know, in Feudal Japan it was the Samurai's right to chop your head off if you were a lower social rank. It's not now. So what is a right and is not a right changed as we see fit to change it. That said, if I understood the OP correctly, it was about a law passed by the UN. If we all agree that these laws should be followed, then, they become the new rights for all of humanity (are at least UN member States).
If there were a hell then you'd have a point. But there isn't so it's really a moot point. One could say that Scientology is all about benefit as well - by rectifying your theta levels. But, like the concept of hell, theta levels are just made up.Thus human rights are created by humans and thought to be for the 'benefit to every human'- And you don't think that religious laws are created the same way- for the 'benefit of every human'- now one has to differentiate between 'benefit'- if one law tries to save you from eternal hell fire that indeed is 'benefit' for humans- So for you to say that your 'human rights' are better for humans than religious law is based on the assumption that the religious law actually do not benefit humans at all- which they do if they actually do stop you from going to hell....
So the difference is really in the view of 'benefit'- and it depends on who believes what. (Q) and everyone here seems to present "Human Rights" as some 'gospel-laws' when they are simply a self-creation which are based on a single viewpoint and have no understanding of anything other than secularist ideas.
Peace be unto you
Has Religion been a benefit to society? I am sure that it has. IMO superstition has a place in society and can still be beneficial. It just needs to be reworked for a peaceful multicultural modern world.
Well, I suppose as long as 786 doesn't violate what other people perceive as their Human Rights, then he can believe whatever he wants to believe - that is within his rights
And anyway. I'm sure 786 does believe in Law.
It’s easier when having a document to reference even with God. Human Rights are an acceptable reference.
Last edited:
Post #37 provides some links.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights are made legitimate by the countries signing them.