The idea of human rights has arguably been the most debated and controversial subject in history. Who gets them, what do they consist of, and how do we enforce such a subjective idea? Answers to these questions have been given tested by the greatest leaders and brightest philosophers, yet in modern times parts of society still contests what constitutes as a human right and who gets them. The six primary documents we read this past week allowed us an insight into how the idea of human rights has been discussed throughout time. Today we might believe it is easy to distinguish humans from nonhumans. To determine what species an animal is, people often use how the animal looks and how it behaves to categorize it. Since animals tend to have the …show more content…
Do our differences go deeper than just appearance? In the eighteen-hundreds, this was a question of great importance and dispute. The confederacy propagated that the differences between African-Americans and white people extended to inequality, while the union campaigned for a more equal treatment. While neither side supported full rights be given to African-Americans, the union leaders were adamant that all men were created equal. In Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, his opening line clearly states that “all men are created equal” and that the objective of the civil war was to integrate this mentality into a unified society. The confederacy, however, believed that the races were inherently unequal and this inequality was based on a sacred difference in their creation. In the Cornerstone Address, by Alexander H. Stephens, he uses the bible as means to condone inequality by making a reference to Genesis 9:20-27. This demonstrates that the Confederacy felt that it was God’s intention to create the races for means of …show more content…
Many believed white people possessed a divine right over African-Americans that rationalized the violence behind slavery. In Alexander H. Stephens Cornerstone Address, given in 1861, he justifies slavery with the inequality of the races. In this speech he claims the division over slavery was the cause for the South’s secession. He explains how the Confederacy’s new constitution put to rest the questions over the enslavement of African-Americans. He discusses how the North’s ideas of slavery being a violation of the laws of nature were wrong in principle. Stephens affirms that the new constitution is based “upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition”. He believed that the recent progression in science justified slavery and this truth was only slow in development. However, the relationship between inequality and slavery went further than the justification behind the Confederacy's intents. The inequality placed upon African-Americans created another form of slavery. Their lack of freedom enslaved them from maintaining a voice in America’s government. Frederick Douglass discussed this in his speech, What to the Slave is the Fourth of July. He states “I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable
“There must be the position of superior and inferior” was a statement by Lincoln which formed the basis of discrimination towards black Americans as it highlighted the attitudes of white Americans. Although civil rights for black people eventually improved through the years both socially and politically, it was difficult to change the white American view that black people are inferior to white people as the view was always enforced by the favour of having “the superior position assigned to the white race”. The period between 1880 and 1990 can be seen as a period of civil strife. The civil rights movement had little impact, with few significant improvements towards the overall goal of equality. Despite the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteen amendments had been set up acting as a baseline of change as it liberated black Americans from slavery and made them freedmen.
After suffering the overwhelming ferociousness and inhumanity of being a slave for over two decades, a black man by the name of Fredrick Douglass fled from enslavement and began to make a concerted effort to advance himself as a human being. Combating many obstacles and resisting numerous temptations, Douglass worked assiduously to develop into a knowledgeable gentleman rather than the involuntary alternative of being an unenlightened slave. In doing so, Douglass successfully emerged as one of the Civil War era’s most prominent antislavery orators. From his first major public speech at the age of 23, Douglass became widely renowned as a premier spokesperson for Black slaves and the movement for the abolition of slavery. In one of Douglass’ most distinguished speeches, “The Meaning of July 4th for the Negro,” he uses the intermittent occasion of speaking on behalf of African Americans to a multitude of White Americans to outline arguments against slavery.
Frederick Douglass made the most of his years after escaping from slavery in 1852. Douglass spread his words against slavery through being a well-known writer. Douglass was one of the most prominent reform leaders of his era (Foner, 481). A popular document written by Frederick Douglass on July 5th, 1852, spread some powerful words among the nation. Douglass’s speech was titled “What to the slave is the Fourth of July”. When his speech was published, his intended audience was his “fellow citizens” and those unaware that the Fourth of July was a day of mourning for slaves; unlike white Americans celebrating the day of freedom. The reason Douglass’s speech was published was to bring attention to the separation on the Fourth of July between white and black Americans. Even though Frederick Douglass was free he could not celebrate but mourn the day for horror of the past and presence of slave cruelty.
The Cornerstone speech was made by Alexander Stephens, the vice president of confederacy on March 21, 1861. To Alexander Stephens the blacks and the slaves were not equal to the whites but could have rights like education and marriage. The whole speech was over the North and South wanting separation because the disagreement over the North wanting the blacks to have equal rights meaning take away slavery. Abraham Lincoln who was the president around the time of the speech was for the North and Alexander Stephens the vice president of the confederate was for the South. The North were trying to enforce the constitution and equal rights for the slaves, while the South wanted to succeeded from the North and to become the Confederate States of America. In the cornerstone speech, Stephens explains his views on the North and South states with the main focus on equal rights of slaves and gives his opinion on what to do if changes are not made.
... Anti-slavery advocates argued that God created all man as equals and therefore all men are equals. Pro-slavery advocates pointed to the long line of slavery in the Bible as justification. Both sides used the Bible as their main justification for their reasons against or for slavery. Since the United States was founded on the principle that no man does not stand equal among his peers, resistance to abolishment of slavery could not hold out forever. Slavery went against the perceived true meaning of God’s word and also against the principles of America. The Christian equality of the North won over the hard-nosed Old Testament South. Eventually the equality America was intended to be founded upon was realized when slavery was abolished.
In Lynn Hunt’s Inventing Human Rights novel, she focuses on revealing the various incidents in which the discussion of human rights were created, critiqued and defined. She asks the question, “If equality of rights is so self-evident, then why did this assertion have to be made and why was it only made in specific times and places?” Her question is ideal. Why would something that is allegedly so self evident have to be discussed and debated about when clearly anyone that is a “human being” is entitled to equal rights?
In his speech, Frederick Douglass made it clear that he believed that the continued toleration and support of slavery from both a religious and legal standpoint was utterly absurd when considering the ideals and principles advocated by America’s forefathers. He began by praising the American framers of the Constitution, an...
Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederacy, referring to the Confederate government: "Its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery . . . is his natural and normal condition." [Augusta, Georgia, Daily Constitutionalist, March 30, 1861.]
Abraham Lincoln’s original views on slavery were formed through the way he was raised and the American customs of the period. Throughout Lincoln’s influential years, slavery was a recognized and a legal institution in the United States of America. Even though Lincoln began his career by declaring that he was “anti-slavery,” he was not likely to agree to instant emancipation. However, although Lincoln did not begin as a radical anti-slavery Republican, he eventually issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves and in his last speech, even recommended extending voting to blacks. Although Lincoln’s feeling about blacks and slavery was quite constant over time, the evidence found between his debate with Stephen A. Douglas and his Gettysburg Address, proves that his political position and actions towards slavery have changed profoundly.
1.) Fredrick Douglass’s purpose in this speech was to explain the wrongfulness of slavery in America. Fredrick Douglass states in his speech “Are the great principles of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us?” and “The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence, bequeathed by your fathers is shared by you, not by me.” These prove that the freedom and independence Americans have aren’t shared with the Africans when it should be that Africans have those rights as well. Frederick Douglass then talked about how badly whites treat blacks and how wrong it is. “There are 72 crimes in Virginia which, if committed by a black man, subject him to a punishment of death, while
Every day, people are denied basic necessary human rights. One well known event that striped millions of these rights was the Holocaust, recounted in Elie Wiesel’s memoir, Night. As a result of the atrocities that occur all around the world, organizations have published declarations such as the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights. It is vital that the entitlement to all rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind, freedom of thought and religion, and the right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being of themselves be guaranteed to everyone, as these three rights are crucial to the survival of all people and their identity.
Introduction One of the main reasons why human rights have been put in place is to protect the public life and public space of every individual being. One fundamental characteristic of human rights is that they are equal rights; they are aimed at providing protection to every person in an equal way. These rights have been entrenched through laws that are passed by states and international conventions. Human rights laws have evolved over time, and have been shaped by several factors, including philosophical theories in the past. This paper looks at the theories of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills, and how their teachings can be used to explain the sources of human rights.
His main argument in the speech is that it 's unjust and hypocritical for a country to celebrate its freedom while it still has slaves. Now that in itself is a morally viable argument, and it has never been more relevant than today in our racially hate fueled world where every situation is turned into a hate crime. However, back in those days majority of slaves were sold into slavery by their own people. Most slaves were sold by rival tribes as prisoners of war, or trouble makers of the tribe, thus giving us the “bottom of the barrel” of the groups. Another counter to Douglass was that even though slaves were people, they were still considered property. A hard working farmer could have used his last penny in order to purchase that slave because he was unable to tend his farm and provide for his family. One common misconception was that all slaves were beaten and treated lower than swine, while to the contrary some were treated well being given a bed and meals every day in exchange for their hard work. While Douglass may have had a bad time under the ownership of Auld, most northern states did not treat their slaves in this manner. This is one of the main reasons Douglass learned how to read, yet no credit is given to his former owner. Most slaves developed a relationship with their owners, in which their owners taught them useful skills such as reading, writing, simple math and farming skills. Another argument brought into Douglass’ speech was that most churches were segregated, and in turn perpetuated the racism that helped keep slavery alive in well. He proposed that a God that wouldn’t allow such evil and disservice in this world would contradict everything the bible proposes and teaches. He praises the writers of the constitution, considering them his equal and thanking the signers of the Declaration of Independence, calling
113-117 Human Rights: Politics and Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
While on one hand there is a growing consensus that human rights are universal on the other exist critics who fiercely oppose the idea. Of the many questions posed by critics revolve around the world’s pluri-cultural and multipolarity nature and whether anything in such a situation can be really universal.