All imperatives can command either hypothetically o... ... middle of paper ... ...g as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it”(19). Kant’s requirement that the law of behavior you set for yourself be universal implies that you act toward others in the way that you would want them to act toward you. The same idea is plain in Mill’s definition, every person is free when it comes to their own actions and so must abstain from impeding another persons with your behaviors. Both Kant and Mill seem to mandate that in your actions as a free individual we do not harm others. This ethical thread that runs through both these theories bears hints of the golden rule that one should treat others, as he himself would want to be treated.
What is human rights? According to the New World Encyclopedia Human rights are those rights that each person is entitled to simply because he or she is a human being. Human rights are guaranteed by law no matter one’s nationality and should not be violated by any state or none-state officials. The idea of human rights depends on the possibility that every individual has worth and nobility and in this way merits certain fundamental freedoms.  With the acknowledgement of these basic freedoms, each person can make their own decisions and form their own opinions without their rights of safety or security being violated or threatened by government or nongovernment bureaucrats.
Utilitarianism and the Right to Life for the Innocent Human rights are perceived to be universal and inalienable. Some people believe that human rights are absolute. The right to life is a basic human right, and it should not be arbitrarily deprived of anyone. The right to life extends to the security and liberty of life and not to be deprived of it except in accordance with principles of fundamental justice. These attributes are aimed at protecting all human beings at all times.
Each person has the same conditions, which is why no one has any interest in becoming a burden to others because if someone gives up their rights while you give up your own, you are all equal and expected to follow the same rules. If you are all following the same conditions, in essence you are gaining everything you are losing because you are gaining increase force of preservation because everyone has to be safe to live. This is why giving up rights is important because it allows for laws to be made which gives a person the protection they crave. As Rousseau said “Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole”, meaning that the ge... ... middle of paper ... ...o their neighbor, they gain equal rights because that person in return gives up those rights in order to preserve himself and the state. However, one is not forced to give up their rights, one chooses to do so by residing within the sovereign state’s territory and also by partaking in voting.
We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination”. The three fundamental characteristics of human rights are universal, inalienable, and indivisible. Human rights are universal because they apply to every human being regardless of their origin, economic or social status, and religion, among others. Inalienable refers to rights that once are given to a person cannot be taken away. And human rights are indivisible meaning either all rights are given or none of them.
First, that "reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it" and second, that it teaches primarily that "being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life liberty or possessions." Hence, right from the beginning, Locke places the right to possessions on the same level as the right to life, health, and liberty. We can say that Locke conceived all the natural rights as things which an individual brings with him from birth, and consequently as indefeasible or inviolable claims upon both society and government. Such claims can never be justly set aside, since society itself exists to protect them; they can be regulated only to the extent that is necessary to give them effective protection. In other words, the “life, liberty and estate” of one person can be limited only to make effective the equally valid claims of another person to the same right.
Reason provides man with his own individual rights and obligations and moral rights and duties. Furthermore, Locke writes that “‘The State of Nature has a Law of Nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: And Reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who will consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possession,’” (43). Moreover, man needs an authority to protect and preserve these moral rights which can only executed when, as Locke states, when the “ ‘power and jurisdiction is [are] reciprocal,’” (42). Therefore a social contract is created when human beings unite and the majority of a people agree upon a particular state which protects mans natural freedom and equality. Consequently, since all human beings have certain moral rights to health, liberty, and possessions; they also have the right to enforce the protection of those rights by way of punishing violators.
Since we are by nature all free, equal, and independent, no one can be put out of this estate, and be subjected to the political power of another, without his own consent.”(Right Thing To Do, pg. 214) Owning one’s body means that the person can do what he or she desires with their abilities and talents. “According to this argument, all citizens have a duty to serve their country.” (Right Thing to Do, pg.
The definition of human rights is: “The basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled, often held to include the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression, and equality before the law.” http://www.thefreedictionary.com/human+rights Human rights means being able to work where you’re qualified to work without your skin colour, race or religion being the reason you can’t; it means having the right to be human, that’s why it’s so important. “Human rights are concerned with equality and fairness. They recognise our freedom to make choices about our life and develop our potential as human beings. They are about living a life free from fear, Harassment or discrimination. There are a number of basic rights that people from around the world have agreed on, such as the right to life, freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, rights to a fair trial, free Speech and freedom of religion, rights to health, education and an adequate standard of living.
We see that Locke believes that personal protection also follows as a right when he states, “…hath by nature a power, not only to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate, against the injuries and attempts of other men…” (Locke – 46). With this understanding a person has unlimited rights, even as they pertain to preserving his or her self or family. This begs the question; how can a law be enacted if it goes against the natural rights of man? Locke’s answer can be found when he states, But because no political society can be, nor subsist, without having in itself the power to preserve the property, and in order thereunto, punish the offences of all those of that society; there, and there only is political society, where every one of the members hath quitted this natural power, resigned it up into the hands of the community in all cases that exclude hi not from appealing for protection to the law established by it. (Locke - 46) If a population is to exist then all of those that participate in the functioning of the society must be willing to give up some of their natural rights in order to follow the laws created to allow the society as a whole to greater protect the people, and the propert... ... middle of paper ... ...Trans.