Sentences with phrase «human rights concept»

The Western countries are increasingly using their view of human rights concept as a yardstick to judge developing countries and to deal with economic and trade relations to extend development assistance.

This was a very significant case for women's equality rights as it gave LEAF and its coalition partners an opportunity to elaborate on the key human rights concepts of adverse - effect discrimination and the duty to accommodate, as well as to argue against the idea of «reverse discrimination».

Not exact matches

The party has long railed against Western values, including concepts like multi-party democracy and universal human rights.

Indeed, a lead investigator in the Canadian Human Rights Committee was asked what value he placed on freedom of speech, to which he replied «Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value.»

Although maintaining that the concept of rights applies only to human relations and that therefore animals have none.

Concepts of wealth, disease, sanity, justice, human rights, the humanities, do not make sense in the terms of naturalism.

Actually in the universe there is no right or wrong... this is a human invention... animals don't even subscribe to this concept.

As for human rights, my inclination is to say that a concept of human rights properly understood is still well worth promoting, and need not detract from the political responsibilities that Reno rightly says have been neglected.

In an editorial provocatively titled «Against Human Rights,» he argues that the concept of human rights has become an ideology that functions, at least in the West, as «an enemy of the responsible exercise of freedom,» indeed a «patron of negative freedom, pushing against demands and obligations arising from our shared culture.&rHuman Rights,» he argues that the concept of human rights has become an ideology that functions, at least in the West, as «an enemy of the responsible exercise of freedom,» indeed a «patron of negative freedom, pushing against demands and obligations arising from our shared culture.&Rights,» he argues that the concept of human rights has become an ideology that functions, at least in the West, as «an enemy of the responsible exercise of freedom,» indeed a «patron of negative freedom, pushing against demands and obligations arising from our shared culture.&rhuman rights has become an ideology that functions, at least in the West, as «an enemy of the responsible exercise of freedom,» indeed a «patron of negative freedom, pushing against demands and obligations arising from our shared culture.&rights has become an ideology that functions, at least in the West, as «an enemy of the responsible exercise of freedom,» indeed a «patron of negative freedom, pushing against demands and obligations arising from our shared culture.»

The concept of international human rights from which no country is exempt is consonant with the idea that Shari'a, the large body of legal tradition that informs the Muslim community about how God requires it to live, is in some sense the rule of God.

How do we respond to the idea of international human rights now that we have the United Nations and the concept of common human values?

This enemy — with no concept of human rights — threw the rule book out on fighting, and our soldiers had to face that.

The openhearted observer of Islam in the West can discern the shape of hope in the increasing willingness of people of the two faiths to come together for dialogue and consultation on the mutual problems they face; in the reevaluation of Islam forced upon Muslims by their minority status in many places; and in the development of the concept of international law and universal human rights.

In the political order, there are few concepts as important as basic human rights, and our obligation to protect them, especially where they are being grossly violated, is a primary ethical concern.

In 1992, in the Casey opinion which confirmed America's unlimited abortion licence, Kennedy wrote that «at the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life»....

The very fact that one can have a class of human beings and that this class of persons has real human rights is but one manifestation of the many self - contradictions at the heart of the individualistic concept of life.

The human being, has been expropriated of his basic rights: as a «human resource», he / she only has the right to exist as a function of profitability and of what is now known as «employability», a concept which has replaced that of the «right to work».

The process by which this happened - by which concepts such as personal freedom, human rights and equality have been slowly distorted to mean something quite other than they did when Christian Europe gave birth to them - has been laboriously traced by historians of ideas such as Charles Taylor and Alastair Maclntyre.

Oh, moron it still doesn't come close to the 409 million, keep telling yourself crap to justify your stupidity and blaming atheists for concepts of history you don't understand especially the plight of human rights.

@Roger Bolero «societies ruled by athiests have no concept of love or justice, just a will to power and disregard for human life and rights.»

To engage seriously is to have a clear concept of what constitutes human rights, what is their priority, and what are the means to ensure them.

Since it maybe difficult to agree on any single concept or code of human rights, valid and binding on all, we shall reflect on the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UD) in relation to globalizahuman rights, valid and binding on all, we shall reflect on the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UD) in relation to globalizrights, valid and binding on all, we shall reflect on the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UD) in relation to globalizaHuman Rights (UD) in relation to globalizRights (UD) in relation to globalization.

b) the natural rights theories that based rights on reason and natural law, linked to the concept of the supreme dignity of the human person as a creature of God, who alone had sovereign right over all,

The collapse of the USSR had made for the triumph of capitalistic globalization and the Western individualistic concept of human rights.

Later, in Reflections on America, Maritain wrote: «The Founding Fathers were neither metaphysicians nor theologians, but their philosophy of life, and their political philosophy, their notion of natural law and of human rights, were permeated with concepts worked out by Christian reason and backed up by an unshakeable religious feeling.»

These two concepts have helped in the articulation of human rights theory in the Western countries.

But in the context of my worldview, I don't have to struggle to explain the value of goodness, sacrifice, love, honesty, devotion, human rights, civil rights - concepts that are supremely important to humanity and (to most people) intuitively apparent.

David R. Carlin sees the animal rights movement as anti «Christian and an attempt to promote a purely biological concept of human nature, thus linking it to Hitler and the Holocaust.

Yet Prof. Carlin finds the concept of animal rights to be «extraordinarily dangerous» and considers those who promote this idea to be «enemies of the human race.»

This is why the word transcendent appears in Ramsey's writings; but it is not always clear whether he is stressing the «transempirical» as a concept of imageless thinking or whether there is a «nonobservable» beyond all human endeavor; if it is the latter, there is a question whether we have any right to be articulate about it.

Many in Christian circles now see it as their duty to give strong support to human rights, yet for nearly 2,000 years the concept of human rights was never acknowledged as a Christian value.

Q: Do you oppose the concept of the «Genevan» human rights system?

The libertine guardians of the sexual revolution brook no dissent from the idea, so famously articulated in Casey vs. Planned Parenthood, that «at the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.»

We're talking about the human beings right now, at this very moment, in different parts of this world with no concept of the existence of Christ and christianity.

YOU seem to be suggesting that these modern concepts of human rights are leading us away from God and to hell, a belief that makes you a perfect example of why more and more people are rejecting Christianity!

The collective right to peace demands such a basic approach — in fact and law — that we can no longer afford to regard it merely as a sentimental concept or to confine it to an intellectual category of human rights.

But unlike the idea of human rights, [the concept of natural law] does not claim to be self «constituting.

Kennedy is the same justice who gave out in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) that «At the heart of liberty, is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.»

It is generally agreed that the concept of «Human Rights» is a developing one.

In other words, too much of natural law theory, especially that derived from those thinkers from Grotius on who transposed natural law into natural rights (which after the French Revolution usually became known as «human rights»), relies on a concept of nature that is not natural.

You're right about the fact that human created the concept of eternal soul «after death.»

As to their presuming to set their destination, surely the editors can not complain about that, since they so strongly agree with the Supreme Court dictum in Casey that there is no higher truth than «the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.»

In view of the increasing vulnerability of contemporary societies to a broad range of social risks, including the possibility of total human extinction, the human rights regime needs to incorporate a broader concept of global human security.

Donor countries tend to emphasize their narrow concepts of human rights as a prerequisite to sanction development assistance.

Modernity is represented by three forces - first, the revolution in the relation of humanity to nature, signified by science and technology; second, the revolutionary changes in the concept of justice in the social relations between fellow human beings indicated by the self - awakening of all oppressed and suppressed humans to their fundamental human rights of personhood and peoplehood, especially to the values of liberty and equality of participation in power and society; thirdly, the break - up of the traditional integration of state and society with religion, in response to religious pluralism on the one hand and the affirmation of the autonomy of the secular realm from the control of religion on the other».

Judge Miner, writing for the majority in the Second Circuit, asked: «What concern prompts the state to interfere with a mentally competent patient's «right to define [his] own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life,» when the patient seeks to have drugs prescribed to end life during the final stages of a terminal illness?»

It took the Supreme Court a mere twenty - five years to make this premise explicit, in the famous «Mystery Passage» of the 1992 Casey decision: «At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.»

The battle cry is this war was notoriously formulated by Justice Kennedy in the Casey decision upholding the abortion license in America: «At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.»

As the very notion of the definitive value of the human person is eroded, the concept of absolute right and wrong is lost from legal principle and social practice.

Today, everyone from secular lawyers to church patriarchs declares a commitment to the ideal of «human rights,» based in the concept of «human dignity.»