The Importance Of Human Rights

968 Words2 Pages

Human Rights, Rights given to every human kind, or so we believe. As many years pass, the definition over time changes as well. Before in the US, there were no Women 's rights in the Human rights. Rights that were made for Men, However, over time, with Advocacy from women that had changed. As I read “Human Rights: Chimeras in Sheep’s Clothing?” By Andrew Heard and “What are Human Rights? Four School of Thought” by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour, you begin to see the different views on what people think Human Rights were based on. In my point of view, I agree with both standpoints, However, have been more convincing in God being the one who created human rights. Andrew Heard had described different people who had believed god was the one who created …show more content…

Growing up in a religious family and with what is said in the article my first thought is “if god didn’t want something to happen, he wouldn’t have created it”, I have the mindset of god does things for a reason the patience is just needed to see what the future holds. Except Hugo Grotius had a different thought, “Now the Law of Nature is so unalterable, that it cannot be changed even by God himself.” (Heard 2)Why would Andrew add this into the article? Andrew had explained how god was the creation of all yet he also begins to agree with Hugo on god doesn’t have all the power. God possesses the power to …show more content…

She begins by showing the four schools: Natural Scholars, Deliberative Scholars, Protest Scholars and Discourse Scholars(Dembour 2). Each having their own definition of what they believed Human Rights mean to them and where it was originally developed from. Natural Scholars are where I believe fits me to become a part of while Deliberative Scholars is with whom I disagree with. Natural scholars use the definition that is well commonly known; rights one posses simply by being a human being(Dembour 2). While the Deliberative sees it as a “political values that liberal societies choose to adopt”(Dembour 3). It’s difficult to understand Marie’s definition from the words she uses that I haven 't seen before, which makes it difficult to understand at times what she is trying to convey. Marie has many great examples about the Natural Scholar and their beliefs, but hasn’t been given any more examples or even explain more about the other three schools. Even though Marie’s article is a great read and very detailed, I feel as if it is too long for the audience to keep on reading. The audience would become bored over time and stop reading halfway through the article. If Marie was able to shorten and still give great details, overall it would become a great resource not only to be used in Universities but in High schools as

Open Document