Support
Ask your question
Search
Visual Collection
Popular Questions
- Is organized religion the root of all ... latest post by Subzero | 200 responses
- Why don't schools teach us to form our... latest post by rwt | 20 responses
- When will someone ask STUDENTS what th... latest post by rwt | 10 responses
- Who Protects Us From Them? latest post by Subzero | 5 responses
- Will human beings really ever understa... latest post by Subzero | 47 responses
Popular Topics
Most active users
- Thai sean 1272 posts | member since Nov 11, 2007
- treeless 17 posts | member since Dec 9, 2011
- cyberworldukltd 16 posts | member since Feb 7, 2012
- thedoc 1381 posts | member since Sep 10, 2006
- GDiFonzo 10 posts | member since Nov 9, 2011
Question |
|
||
|
How can we reconcile respect for universal human rights when these rights conflict with traditional cultural and/or religious values? by Frank Davis |
postings
 
Irina Yasina: It is a very good question. You know, universal human rights are more important and people might understand this I hope. Though now in Russia we can see a quite opposite process because universal human rights are trampled on and some wrong interpreted religious and national rules come on the surface. We’ll see. I don’t know when it happens but as I am an optimist I believe that in the near future we will realize that the world has changed. And everything will get better. by Irina Yasina |
Currently video only.
|
by Jerry Mander | 0 votes | 
|
Jerry Mander: Answertext will be available soon. by Jerry Mander |
Jesper Green: Universal human rights is a definition. Universal is just a word worth just as much as religious definition of universal. So I think when we talk about how we can reconcile respect for universal human rights when these rights conflict with traditional and religious values then I think that the overall universal right is as good for human beings as religious human rights. It’s just a matter of definition. It’s just a matter of power. Who can enforce what is universal human rights and what is religious universal human rights. So actually we can have respect for them, or it’s very easy to lose respect for them. Because it’s just a matter of definition what universal human rights are. by Jesper Green |
Jodie Evans: I'm not sure I know what religions conflict with universal human rights. I mean actually, if you look at the core of most religions, universal human rights is there, that we are all one and that we need to respect and see each other as one. What happens is that these religions have been distorted and used to control, to have power over. They're just another form that gets used to distort. So universal human rights is the right of respect of each other. If that just existed, all the other things that we need would come into place. And I think that each religion's kernel or birth came from a place of trying to make an understanding that we only survive as a community, as a people, if we respect each other, if everyone has an opportunity of fulfillment, the basic needs, and I think they started there. But they've been contorted, they've been used. Most indigenous traditional values that I know about have that place. So maybe the error is, is there a universal human right? "What makes our value of what that looks like something that we can impose on someone else," I think is, one of the questions we come back to over and over again. Of the arrogance we have ourselves of, "My way is right or what I feel is the universal human value is right," and not allowing people to explore and find their own way because certainly we haven't found ours very successfully. So maybe the reconciling is more in the allowing of all points of view. by Jodie Evans |
John Gage: The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights states that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act toward one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Now, the sequence of statements of human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, each of the statements begins with all human beings, everyone is entitled, everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person, no one shall be held in slavery. Everyone has the right to recognition, all are equal before the law. Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by national tribunal, and no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, everyone is entitled to full equality. In short, the statements of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are statements for everyone. They apply irrespective of sex, of nationality, of economic status. They apply irrespective of political opinion, of stated belief, independent to religious affiliation, independent of individual feeling about the constellation of supernatural or metaphysical or religious or eminent powers in the world. Everyone has the same rights. So, in many instances, forms of local religious belief, forms of adherence to one book or another that lays out rules, often rules thousands of years old, for how one should behave in a way that allows human beings to live together, rules that made great sense when those books were written. Often those rules come in conflict with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Because in the years that allow bureaucratic forms of churches to arise, schismatic divisions that separate one from another, we find often contradiction and [audio ends]. by John Gage |
Jonathan Granoff: I don't think these human rights do conflict with traditional values. I think that they may conflict with the distortions of those values in institutions, and - but here, let me give an example. Those values are universal and the basis of universal human rights is - is found here. Listen. Listen. Buddhism: hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful, Udana-Varga. Christianity: all things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them. Matthew. Confucianism: do not unto others what you would not have them do unto you, [Analytics]. Hinduism: this is the sum of duty: do not unto others that which would cause you pain if done to you. Mahabharata. Islam: no-one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself. Hadith. Jainism: in happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self. Lord Mahavir. Judaism: what is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow human being. That is the law. All the rest is commentary. The Talmud. Zoroastrianism: that nature only is good when it shall not do unto another whatsoever is not good for its own self. [Danistani Dinek]. These are universal values. They're not the property of any religious franchise or any particular tradition. These are the qualities and values that are intrinsic to the human architecture. And the human architecture comes from the divine mystery, and the divine mystery has placed beautiful qualities and values and attributes within the human soul that finds resonance in the human conscience that has to find articulation in the human hand, in the human intellect, in the human institutions. So, human rights, the right of respecting the lives of others as one's own life, the highest human life, the human unity and the sacredness of life, these are universal. They are not of any tradition and any religion. And to the extent that any religion or tradition distorts these values, they're outside of the great universal way articulated so clearly in the golden rule found in every tradition, amongst all peoples. The sun of goodness and caring shines upon all. |
Jonathan Meese: Things, which are standing apart and moving apart, are good because they are anti and the same. Inside of themselves. What are universal human rights? Did we already ask the human rights what they want? Or are human rights just the putting together of human and rights. What is traditional? What is simulated religiosity? What is value? What is harmony? What is respect? Are we in danger? Are we out of danger? What do we have to pay attention to? What is the secret zone? See Planet of the apes. Are there secret zones? What happens inside of them? What happens inside of secret chambers? Who is universal? What is elementary? What is total elementariness? Are there not only circles, squares, the sign of infinity and triangles? What is pyramidal? Who was Enchnaton? Wasn't Enchnaton the most upright person? Isn't tradition what Alex DeLarge created? Incurable. Is not the most traditional our incurable? We are incurable, but not ill? What is harmony? Nietzsche? Is Nietzsche harmony? Is Nietzsche a fable? Is Nietzsche religion? Is Zarathustra god? Isn't cereal the total future? Isn't the cereal wheel the future? Has the wheel already been designed? Has it already been inserted? What is a weapon? Aren't weapons a human right, aren't we weapons? Aren't we the weapon of individual human rights, which is inside of us? Who is birth? What is the place of birth? Where do human being come from? Why do human beings come? |
Jonathan Stack: Well, sometimes we can and sometimes we can't reconcile, but I don't think that for the most part there is a conflict between these two rights. Part of the universal human rights is diversity. So, we are not going to necessarily find synthesis of all those things. But, I figure the only way to deal with all of this is just mortification and better stories. There are no traditional ideas and values so embedded that they too don't change. There was a time when these stories replaced other stories and today's stories that seem so locked into place or the values that we hold so -- the values that we believe in so strongly that we interpret in such locked in ways that they don't change. That's going to change too. That too will change. I think that it's not my role or our role here to determine the values for our whole collective society. I remember when I was in the eighth grade, some kid said human rights, they begin where my fist ends and your nose begins, and in a way it's like my human rights and what my values are, have to be very carefully managed against where your rights begin and your values are. And that can only be found out and constantly be reworked through dialog and that's what I love about film making because it's just about asking those questions and getting those answers and constantly working and reworking and working. People say to me, when does the film end, when is it ready, it usually ends when the money runs out or the client wants the film. But, the stories themselves don't end and the answer to this question, there is no one single answer. It's a constant renegotiating and that's the difficulty of it and indeed the joy of it. |
José Manuel Prieto: It’s an answer to question 18: How can we reconcile respect for universal human rights, when these rights conflict with traditional cultural and/or religious values? I think, that in this case it’s very difficult always to find a correct strategy/behaviour. I think our common sense demands that we shouldn’t exaggerate the implementation of practices or the claim of certain universal right which could conflict with certain cultural practices an d traditions, what means that we should become reconciled, that we should discuss and understand. []. I think that we should primarily use our common sense, e.g. in the case of the usage of veils [in the] islamic countries. I think that these countries are the ones that finally will develop their own guidelines and will harmonize the universal rights with their traditional values. I think that it’s the task of the societies of all the countries to search [] for a solution for every case. This is what I think about that question. Thank You. |
Jwan M. Aziz: I do not think the traditional or the religious values conflict with universal human rights. I just think there is kind of misunderstanding between understanding these values and understanding the religion, because religions in the world like Christianity, Judaism, Islam or any other religion do not conflict with respect the human rights, but the traditional values change with the time. We may hope that the new generations reform some old traditional values which they got from their parents and grandparents. Thank you. by Jwan M. Aziz |
Kailash Satyarthi: Well, it's an interesting question. But, let me tell you that there is no inherent conflict between the fundamental universal human rights and the positive values of our traditions and religions. True that the beliefs, the myths, the wrong traditions which are prevailing in the name of religion and cultures in our society go against justice, go against equality, go against some of the fundamental human rights. But, they are just the negative values which are still prevailing in our cultures and in the name of religions, in the garb of religions. But, on the other hand, there are huge amount of liberated values and positive values, as well as the positive traditions, even the stories in our traditions and cultures which we can dig out and we have to dig out. So, the most important things include that the values related to justice, liberty, equality and freedom have to be digged out from our cultures and religions and they should be interpreted in such a manner that the human rights could be promoted. Secondly, we have to demystify the human rights. Sometimes, we use the connotations, the phrases, the language, the jargons in the human right discourse which are not really comfortable with ordinary people. And, sometimes, apparently, it looks that they go against the cultures and religions. That is not true. So, if we can devise a way where each universal human right could be linked with some of our social, cultural, traditional and religious teachings, that will definitely be very helpful, and that is possible. In case of child rights, which is of course a part of human rights in India and worldwide, I myself in my moment we try to explain and interpret the child rights in the wider context of the positive teachings and positive values in our religions and cultures. There is always great things in the religious books and teachings of the big leaders. |
|
|
by Kamal Boullata | 0 votes |
|
Kigge Hvid: Hello Frank... in New York! Hi! So, how can we do that? I don’t know how we should do that. But, I think that one thing is for really, really sure and that is that the global human rights should prevail over all other rights in the world. That might sound hard, that’s just a part of democracy, that’s also a part of living again together in a global society. We simply have to have some values, some rules, some legislation that ensure us that we cherish the same overall values which really are about liberty, about having the right to cover basic needs. So basically they should; and if they would conflict with traditional or religious value, that’s a problem we have to solve and that’s a problem we see many places in the world. But, it is something we have to solve that which would be up to the international society, to governments and to individuals to see too that these values, the overall values of the human society are accepted, are lived by all over the world. by Kigge Hvid |
Kurt Weidemann: If the religions in this world are opposed one to another or if their doctrines diverge a lot from their application then they should be deprived of power no matter if it is Islam or Buddhism or Christianity or Judaism or Hinduism. Our Christian religion tells us that God created man in his own image and that very man crucified his son. That shows that the doctrine and its application differ in such a strong way that they should not be accepted any more. Luckily the wars inspired by religion or by religious believe do no longer exist. If they are gone for good can't be said for sure now if we think of the fanaticism of Islamic fundamentalists these days. Any kind of fanaticism and any kind of craving for power or hunger for world domination must be vehemently fought and prevented. |
Lesego Rampolokeng: Tradition, religion are very safe as homes from which to operate, from which to visit untold horrors upon others. Tradition and religion are used for the oppresion of other beings. And, if that is indeed right, they have to backtrack a little bit and say, "universal human rights," I mean what -- what essentially are we talking about there? Are we talking about all creatures across this existence of ours and their right to exist within the zone in which we are with respect, with dignity, with all of the position? If that is what we are talking about, if we are saying it is about the positive that which is meant to respect, to celebrate humanity, even that’s what we are talking about and we backtrack and see the religion and so-called tradition, things, concepts that have been utilized to work precisely against us being human, then I think perhaps there is a call for an entire, total, complete overhaul and an onslaught against those values. At the same time, I respect all human beliefs if they are not cared towards the oppression, this oppression and the exploitation of others.
Wretch oppression bleed |
Leung Ping-Kwan: The basic dignities was, could we curtail the basics like freedom of expression and freedom of speech, to be able to keep one’s own religion/lifestyle? When this happens, is to choose work and to choose places with faith. Indeed, in some of the countries nowadays, these basic needs are not met and there are restrictions for them. I think the reason which would be, I mean if you look back at different countries and their political agenda and provinces and this country’s ideology and we may see, because of their particular ideology, they may not like the actual happen and there seems there could be a conflict within the faith restriction and the need for the basic respect for the human dignity and not that we let so many people to [inaudible], but I think because of this dictatorship, our country and the people’s ideology, they put the privilege of their faith in front of the religions and that’s the reason why a lot of times, the human freedom or the human dignity seems to be sacrificed because of the faith and ideologies. |
Lijun Fang: First, I think, we should attempt to coexist with each other. The coexistence of Confusion, Buddhism and Taoism in ancient China was very successful. They can even be in the same temple at the same time. Their thoughts were exchanging. There are also many good examples that Christianity, Catholicism, Islam, Buddhism and Taoism exist in the same village or in the same region and communicate with each other. If it is impossible to coexist, we would have no choice but to change ourselves to someone else. Can we accept that? If no, then the third choice would be to exterminate the opposite or to be exterminated. by Lijun Fang |
Lillian Holt: Well, ultimately I don't think that they should conflict with traditional religious values because universal human rights are universal human rights. I think it's our interpretation of those universal human rights. I mean the need for people to be needed, wanted and loved; to have access to enough food and to have a warm bed to sleep in and enough food to eat. I mean to me that's a universal human right and I believe the United Nations statistics says that if I have a warm bed to sleep in, enough food to eat, and a roof over my head then I am in the top 7% of the world’s population. Now you know the right to this and the right to that, there’s a whole range of other things and I know that cultural convention can intrude in these areas, but ultimately the truth of humanity and the universal human rights cannot be trampled upon. And as I said -– and we have many documents that say that -- but they are trampled upon. I know that. But it's also about interpretation and it becomes sometimes it's a question of fundamentalism. Whose interpretation are right? But it is not right to impede the human rights of the people, and that includes the physical, mental and spiritual development, and life. by Lillian Holt |
Livingstone Maluleke: Thank you. The issue of the human rights is based on ethics. They are not universal. Rights are not universal because every environment has got its own rights. This also includes and adheres to the issue of the equal rights, attuned by the equal rights. The culture, the society in which we find ourselves, and also are we able to say that the universality of human rights is in all aspects the same. Really, these are the debates that we need to try and bring together so that we are able to depict what we mean by the human rights. Therefore, that is why in some cases some human rights conflict with the traditional aspect of human. Like, there will be other aspects whereby communities find, for an example, the ritual king is an aspect which was traditionally accepted or which was in practice. And of course, in today's world in globalization we need to also consider the issue of ethics when we're looking at all this human rights, which sometimes is of religious value; which, of course, is based on the venting and abuse of certain rights. Are we not abusing certain rights if we practice without enough valuing the traditional and the religious approach of certain communities? And in that way, really, we need to consider all these things in order to have the human rights respected, not to conflict with the traditional and religious values. |
postings
