Why is the author’s theory of rights correct and the existing doctrine on human rights incorrect?

The existing doctrine came from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights  issued by the United Nations in 1948. The sources of this document were the numerous articles written in the 1920’s – 1940’s by idealists whose intent was to eradicate not only the patent mistreatment of people but their deprivations as well. In other words, they were trying to design an ideal society. When rights are invented to support a human purpose they are tied to that purpose and usually to the values, philosophy and possibly religious beliefs of those persons who formulated and supported that definition of rights. Other people with different values, philosophy or religion might choose different rights. Therefore, rights that originate in this manner may not be universal. Articles 22-29 of the UN declaration are called “social and economic rights” and come into this category.

Rights that are enforced on everybody must really be universal rights. To be universal they must be evident to everybody regardless of gender, race, cultural group or religion. Other subjects that fit this criterion are mathematics, the laws of science, and the balance of nature which are irrefutable by any rational person. The source of human rights is, admittedly, not so thoroughly bonded together but can still pass the test of truth apparent to any reasonable person.  From this approach the theory of human rights in the subject book was developed and can properly claim to be universal and correct. Much of the prevalent doctrine on rights cannot.

Filed under: Uncategorized | December 5th, 2012