It depends on what rights, and what the situation is. In general, do we have a responsibility to relieve suffering? Yes. However, when the human rights of two people conflict, should a third party step in? Not always. And what rights? And under what circumstances? Should I intervene with the Federal Government that is removing the human right of bearing arms from convicted criminals? ... Probably not. Some people use their rights as sledgehammers, trying to get their way. Other people suffer silently. Are each equally entitled to their rights, of course... entitled to my intervention? Probably not. Are both truly suffering? Probably not. Our Human Rights are bound to infringe on other people's, even as we go throughout a day. Someone's right to their smoking habit is going to bother someone else who has the right to live in a smoke-free environment. Someone's prayer is going to offend someone else who hates religion. Someone's voicing of hatred is going to interfere with someone else's desire to have a peaceful day. Do we need to work together to solve these problems and make compromises? Indeed. Do we need to step into other people's lives and choose sides? In very few cases... only when the strong are preying upon the weak and there is a clear abuse of power.
A decision to intervene in some human rights situations but not others
Non, slaves had no rights. They were considered property. However, by modern standards, they had all their rights violated.
A government in power may argue that rights can be violated if
To declare U.S. rights to intervene in Latin America
Pizza
The right to bare arms. No shirts, no shoes!
George W. Bush: Iraq InvasionNecessary to Establish Democracy and End Humans Rights Abuses Bush Administration Urges Tough Human Rights Stance Against Iran and North Korea Human Rights Advocates: Some US Allies as Problematic on Human Rights as US Enemies ANSWER: An acknowledgment that strong words on human rights are not always applied equally to all nations The answer for this one is NOT: A decision to intervene in some human rights situations but not others
The colonists think the writs of assistance violated their rights because they wanted it to be secure in their home.
yes
nothing
No
By anti-semitism