Can and Should Human Rights Be Universal?

2488 Words10 Pages
Can and should human rights be universal? Ever since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drawn up in 1948, there has been extensive debate over whether these rights can and should apply to every individual. It is a complex and often-provocative issue, the advantages and complications of which can rigorously divide opinion. This essay argues for a universal understanding of human rights. I will show that an absolute universal understanding of human rights must be adopted in order to ensure the dignity of every human being and to achieve the ultimate goal of world peace. I will do this by explaining the failings of the opposing theory to universalism, cultural relativism, as well as why universality of human rights is an essential aspect of human progression and is a necessity if we are to live in a world free from war and poverty. Firstly, it is important to consider the nature of human rights. Although interpretations of, and attitudes towards human rights can vary with significant degree, most share at least a few common aspects. For one, human rights are attributed to us, solely for our nature of human being (Orend, 2002, p. 41). It is this very nature that affords every individual his or her own human rights. Secondly, there are things that ought or ought not to be done to or for every human being. Perry argues that what is good and what is bad for a particular human being always depends on some thing about them or about their context or situation (1997, p. 468). Yet, it can be said that such things as having dignity and rights to water and sanitation are universally good for human beings, while the act of being tortured or oppressed are universally bad for human beings. Nevertheless, there remains widespread disagreement over whether the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights can apply to all human beings, regardless of their
Open Document