Human Rights And Moral Rights

Good Essays
A right is an individual’s entitlement to freedom of choice and well-being. We have the right to live without interference from others and government, free will. A legal right is the entitlement that derives from a legal standpoint that allows someone to act in a specific way and for others to react in specified ways. For instance, the U.S. Constitution states all citizens have the right to the freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. These rights guaranteed to us as citizens of the United States of America. A moral right is a universal right that all human beings of every race or nationality has the same rights because we are humans. Human rights based off the fact that we are human beings and possess the right by virtue. These rights…show more content…
This is another important right. Not only do you have the right to do what you want but you also have the right for others to invoke protection for those actions and to receive aid from others. You have the moral right to do something then I have the moral right for doing it. If one has the moral right to do something then they also have the right to not have interference from anyone. Another aspect of this moral right is the aid of others. Aiding and assisting an individual with ensuring their liberty. One is justified in restraining anyone who tries to prevent them from exercising their rights. We have moral rights and the right to protect others and ourselves from those who oppose our rights.
A right is an entitlement each individual has to something. We are entitled to these rights because the laws in the land we live in ensure those rights. We have both moral rights and legal rights. Rights enable an individual to pursue their interest. Legal rights ensure that a person has a right to act a certain way or is entitled for others to treat them a certain way. Individuals also have moral rights. Moral rights are typically thought of as universal and are not limited to any
…show more content…
We had to ask ourselves, would we accept the actions of others if they were placed in our predicament. His philosophy mirrored the “golden rule” of doing unto to others, as you would have them do unto you. However, on the same note: one cannot base everyone’s actions on the actions of one person. These actions are used when determining moral right and wrong. Categorical imperative determines moral rights based off universalizability and reversibility. Universalizability speaks to the reason for one’s actions must be reasons that everyone would act on, or principle. The other hand, reversibility speaks to how the action reflect on a whole. Would you be willing to have others treat you the way you were going to treat someone
Get Access