Islam and The Universal Declaration Of Human Rigths

Here are some of the main articles of the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights to which a number of countries, including Australia, India , China , most of Europe and South America voted in favour.

Article 1.

  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.

  • Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.

  • Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.

  • No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.

  • No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

 

Article 6.

  • Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.

  • All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.

  • Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.

  • No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.

  • Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

 

A number of Islamic countries  originally also voted in favour of the declaration (whereas Israel did not), however, since the Eighties they have declared that the UDOHR contradicts Sharia Law (No surprises there, having your right hand chopped off for adultery is a violation of articles 2 and 5 , for example.)

 

From Wikipedia:

“In 1982, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, said that the Declaration was “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition” which could not be implemented by Muslims without conflict with Sharia.[30]”

 

“What needs to be pointed out to those who uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to be the highest, or sole, model, of a charter of equality and liberty for all human beings, is that given the Western origin and orientation of this Declaration, the “universality” of the assumptions on which it is based is – at the very least – problematic and subject to questioning. Furthermore, the alleged incompatibility between the concept of human rights and religion in general, or particular religions such as Islam, needs to be examined in an unbiased way.[32]”

 

Interesting that countries like China or India have also signed up and last time I checked they were not Western countries, however, their spiritual traditions like Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism would be very much in accordance with the declaration of human rights, therefore refuting that it is a Western concept.

Of course every country is guilty of acting against the declaration of human rights, human nature being what it is.

What follows on Wikipedia is a good example of moral relativism :

A strong argument can be made that the current formulation of international human rights constitutes a cultural structure in which western society finds itself easily at home … It is important to acknowledge and appreciate that other societies may have equally valid alternative conceptions of human rights.”[34]

What rights are we talking about here? The right to kill unbelievers and apostates? The right to hurt, oppress and subjugate women in the name of religion and law? the right to imprison and torture people for private transgressions like “adultery” or marrying a person your family did not choose?

Why not the right to eat people and sacrifice babies for “Satanists”? Why not the right to rape 5 year olds for paedophiles?

Of course moral relativism in many ways is a good thing, as it allows people to express their individuality, creativity and culture.But when take to extremes, moral relativism becomes a license for harm, torture and murder.

Posted on July 8, 2014, in 1Uncategorized, Cognitive Dissonance, Faketivists, Law & Government, Middle East. Bookmark the permalink. Leave a comment.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: