WORDatTheNet

Home » Other Doctrines » ‘Human rights’ and ‘women’s rights’: Are they real?

‘Human rights’ and ‘women’s rights’: Are they real?


Today’s generation is bombarded with popular terms such as human rights and women’s rights. For example, recently, Philippines has been bombarded by the ‘slam’ report of human rights monitors concerning Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte’s threat to kill a smuggler.

A facade of a building is like human and women's rights seen externally to be beneficial but can't be used as a shelter.

A facade of a building is like human and women’s rights seen externally to be beneficial but can’t be used as a shelter.http://www.wordatthenet.com

On the other hand, there are reports concerning Reproductive Health Law being pursued to be implemented despite  its constitutionality is being questioned before the Philippine Supreme Court.

Both invoked the words “human rights” and additionally “women’s rights” for Reproductive Health Law. Also, in the case of same-sex marriage, the same rights are being invoked.

But in reality, is there such kind of rights? Or are they only delusional? Or are they actually wrongs?

Let us try testing this counter-argument to the present beliefs, if these rights are actually in existence.

First premise:  These rights are not being invoked for other purposes, except in relation to the use of a human body. For example, we say human rights violation when someone is abusing someone’s body, either physically, psychologically, sexually, etc. or all of the above or killing that body outside the available judicial processes. If you abuse a woman physically, sexually or psychological, you could be accused of violation of women’s rights.

On the other hand, in worst cases, one may abuse his own body through legal process, e,g euthanasia, which is allowed in some jurisdictions. Or in the case of reproductive health law, the decision to have a child or impair one’s capability to reproduce  is  dependent on the couple concerned by using contraceptives.

Second premise: Rights are inherently attached to the ownership of a thing. Under ordinary circumstances, you are not entitled to  use a thing which you don’t own without the consent of the owner. Otherwise, it is morally bad.

Third premise: You don’t own your body because you had not produced, made or created it. In fact, anytime, such body can be taken from you even without your consent.

Therefore, foregoing premises considered, the alleged ‘human rights’ and ‘women’s rights’ are not real and the use of your body are only based on human privileges.

Related articles:

>>>To Home Page to also proceed to The Forum

Advertisements

Archives

Categories

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 195 other followers

%d bloggers like this: