"Right" to life

Human Rights

What are human rights, and how can one define the immensity that it carries? One may be quick to define human rights as that which only pertains to the individual, but then you run into a problem. Because if you attempt to close the borders around individuality, then you collide with the sway of freedom and what affects others. People will claim that all things are their ‘right’ and freedom. But in reality, killing and other such hennas acts cannot and should not be allowed to be defined. Whereas persons cannot be allow to claim a personal right because they will then seek to redefine, and attempt to beguile for the sense of freedom has been transformed. People will attempt to declare that all they do is justified because they seek it and because they believe it to be true.

Then you may desire to side with an alternative. To declare that instead of individual rights we must strive for communal rights. But this also has downfalls of its own. For when you declare certain rights that are to be granted, people may be left out. Or worst yet, the rights may be weighed less or assumed to be suspended. From the words of a great piece of literature, “All animals are created equally, but some are more equal than others.” For either way you go it appears there is no way out of the trench of human frailty and weakness. When you place such power within the hands of humans, they tend to redefine and to restructure so as to be fitting for the choice pick. Really for when you allow people to fail, and without consequence others will then feel the baring down of the beast’s teeth.

Instead of justly defining what is a person’s right, we must here in define what is human and what is essential. We must broaden the scope of human knowledge, not in things outside of us, but of what we are in ourselves. We must see who we are, before we can say what we need. This way we can altogether avoid the redefining of what we need, while maintaining the necessity of human equality. If we are then able to see clearly what all need, and what all do not need. We then will be able to say what a right is, and what a claim is. Whether the claim is valid or not is not the point, but whether everyone is held to the same high standard.

Within this then we can see fully what is, and what is not the truth. Take for instance a child within its mother’s womb. This child has a right because it exists, not just as flesh does, which exists solely and contingently on a host, but exists on its own and still needs the essentials. To deem a child part of the mother, so as to say it has no rights, but is a mere lump of flesh is fallacious. It is as if to say that the food which we eat is a part of us, a child is not even the same as food. But shares in the same difference as the food, this similarity a child has with food is this. They are both not the same thing as which they are contained in. This means that any food substance has an identity and structure which does not pertain to the one consuming.

The same is with a child and its mother. The child is not the mother, it is not the same in any way shape or form. The child has a shape and definition which is beyond comparison to that of its mother. It is like comparing a man to a woman. They both may have similarities, they both also may have comparable cell structure or be biologically related, but they are not the same. The same is with the child and their mother, the baby may have much of its mother’s cells, but it also has many of the fathers cells. Because if this, but not limited to this, we are shown that the child has its own rights. Not because it is the simplicity of two being joined as one, for a house is like that. But because it is something new and unique, you cannot say a child is then the right of the mother to decide its fate, because the child is its own. The child may rely on the support of the mother, but is that not the same as we rely on the necessity of shelter and food? This child is merely relying on the mother, to deny the child shelter and food is to deny the child its human rights.

And to deny human rights is to violate the bare and God given right to life, and to do this is to violate our own rights. Because if we say that we do not respect even the small, we do not respect our self, because if an un-born child cannot be respected then neither should we be.