Universal Declaration, or not?

Today, December 10, marks the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Spearheaded by former U.S. first lady and U.N. delegate Eleanor Roosevelt, the UDHR guaranteed the political and civic rights of all people, including the right to freedom from torture, slavery, poverty, homelessness and other forms of oppression.

It's been 60 years, and we are still far from living up to this worthy "universal" declaration, even -- especially? -- in the U.S. Will we ever get there?

Perhaps it's an idealistic fantasy to expect global acceptance and application of these principles. But in 1948, they were adopted by a unanimous vote in the U.N. So, why should we not hold all nations, including our own, up to these basic standards?

Mike Treder

Comments

[Tom Craver]

The big problem with the UDHR is that the framers either didn't know, or deliberately obfuscated (in order to secure approval by oppressive nations) the meaning of "rights".

A right is something that you can morally demand be ensured, by force if necessary.

In order to get the UDHR agreed to, it was apparently necessary to ignore the difference between inalienable and contingent rights, negative and positive rights.

[the oakster1]

How long you planning on being alive Mike? How long you plainning on being in charge?

YOu know, there's a thing called religion, specifically, supervantural relgion that doesn't survive by truth, but by means of fear mongering and playing stupid and social incrowding. Believe and you will believe; this apparently(according to James Burke) goes back to 'Saint' Augustine around 4 or 5 hundred A.D. It's all mental tricks like that. I"ve already explained all this to you; which is interesting in itself!

[kurt9]

A fundamental problem with the UDHR is the failure to differentiate between negative and positive rights. You cannot promise the protection of positive rights of some people without infringing on the negative rights of others.

[Lefty]

"ESPECIALLY" the US???? Chinese, Cuban, Iranian, Venezuelan death camps... and "ESPECIALLY" the US??? I don't care what side of the isle your on 'Mikey' thats just anti-American BULLSHIT

[Mike Treder, CRN]

Lefty - Obviously the US is not the only nation to fall short of the UDHR, and just as obviously it is far from the worst offender.

My point is that the US presents itself as a special case -- "a shining city on a hill" -- and therefore has an even greater obligation to maintain adherence to human rights principles.

When the US does fall short, as especially so in the last eight years with rendition, torture, and suspension of habeus corpus, then its position of moral leadership is badly eroded.