Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

John Thomas8
Posts: 4366
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:44 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby John Thomas8 » Sun Jan 12, 2014 10:53 pm

The BBC "Big Question". Linkie thingy, [/break1]bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03qfjbj/hd/The_Big_Questions_Series_7_Episode_2/]here.





Be polite, but show your work.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 5023
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Mikedunford » Sun Jan 12, 2014 10:57 pm

The poll is missing, IMO, an important choice: religious rights are human rights.

John Thomas8
Posts: 4366
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:44 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby John Thomas8 » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:14 pm

No, I politely but emphatically disagree.

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 11504
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Eastern West Coast

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby ZekeB » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:15 pm

Whos religion? If I may ask.

John Thomas8
Posts: 4366
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:44 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby John Thomas8 » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:21 pm

Pick one, there's about 3,000 to chose from.

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 11504
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Eastern West Coast

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby ZekeB » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:24 pm

As long as your religion doesn't interfere with my human rights, I just don't care.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 5023
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Mikedunford » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:24 pm

No, I politely but emphatically disagree.

Perhaps it would be good to step back for a second and ask a more fundamental question: how are you defining "religious rights?"

John Thomas8
Posts: 4366
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:44 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby John Thomas8 » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:32 pm

No, I politely but emphatically disagree.

Perhaps it would be good to step back for a second and ask a more fundamental question: how are you defining "religious rights?"

We'll go with the one at the linkie thingy.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 5023
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Mikedunford » Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:35 pm

No, I politely but emphatically disagree.

Perhaps it would be good to step back for a second and ask a more fundamental question: how are you defining "religious rights?"

We'll go with the one at the linkie thingy.

I can't get the video to work - it keeps giving me an "only available in UK" error.

John Thomas8
Posts: 4366
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:44 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby John Thomas8 » Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:01 am

Oh, sorry. I don't know of an alternative.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 31484
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:41 am

Currently BBC iPlayer TV programmes are available to play in the UK only, but all BBC iPlayer Radio programmes are available to you. Why?If you are in the UK and see this message please read this advice.Go to the BBC iPlayer Radio homepage


User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 6975
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a collaborative facility run by the U.S. And Canada
Contact:

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Kriselda Gray » Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:43 am

I can't see the video, either, so I don't know what the definition of "religious rights" the site is using. But I would say that – in general – I tend not to believe in "absolutes." I don't think that anything is always good or always bad, or always right as opposed always wrong. Whether something is right or not – to me – depends on the context of the situation. As such, while I do believe that people have the right to worship as they see fit and live their lives in accordance with their faith's moral codes, but I don't think that confers upon them the right to try to coerce others to abide by those same beliefs and codes – especially when it comes to the idea of enforcing them through the legislative process or judicial system. When it comes to establishing moral guidelines for society, I believe that those guidelines – which of course eventually also includes laws – need to be based solely what is best for society as a whole while respecting the civil rights of the individual members of that society – including their right to live by the tenets of their OWN faith, and not have the faiths of others override their own beliefs.I think for me, part of what it comes down to is that when you talk about human rights, the way I look at it anyway, religious rights are actually a subset of human rights. As such, humans rights would be what needs to be fulfilled first, and then The rights from the various more specified categories – such as religious - are on a somewhat lower rung of the scale, just because of the hierarchical nature of the construct.I don't know if I'm really explaining what I think very well. If some of this strikes you as being loopy-headed or laughable, please ask me questions about the issues you have before just laughing at me or telling me my ideas are idiotic. Part of why I post here is to learn, and to do that I sometimes need to toss some still fairly raw ideas out and see what the reaction to them is and in answering questions about what I'm thinking, it forces me to evaluate it even more closely and think through the issues that have been raised – and that is something I absolutely relish.

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 10125
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Suranis » Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:39 am

I think the question could be phrased better, but in general the answer would be yes in the case of fundamental human rights, such as the UN charter of Human rights. But people drag more questionable things into human rights all the time (Such as abortion, the right not to have power lines near them upsetting their property values, even the right to wear burkas.) In general, if a religious practice causes direct physical harm to someone then it should be opposed, or it makes the operation of the law more awkward it should be disregarded in favour of the greater good.And I cant get the video to work either.
Have you tried the Internet? It's made out of millions of people missing the point of everything and then getting angry about it.

User avatar
Lani
Posts: 724
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:01 pm

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Lani » Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:53 am

This makes no sense as worded. There are a couple of high profile cases in the UK over wearing the cross, however. One involved a nurse who worked with people with dementia. Nurses were not allowed to wear necklaces. They were possibly going to be grabbed as they dangled, and also unsanitary. The complaining nurse demanded her right to wear a cross necklace. The hospital said no, but you can have a lapel pin or earrings. She's been screaming ever since.The other involved a flight attendant who wanted to wear a cross necklace. The company said no, but she could wear earrings or a brooch. She's suing for a necklace.

User avatar
Chilidog
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:36 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Chilidog » Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:26 am

Religious rights can only take precedence over civil rights when the tenets of a religion are voluntarily self applied. Once a particular religious tenet is no longer applied voluntarily or strictly to one self, then civil right take precedence.

User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 6975
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a collaborative facility run by the U.S. And Canada
Contact:

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Kriselda Gray » Mon Jan 13, 2014 7:15 am

This makes no sense as worded. There are a couple of high profile cases in the UK over wearing the cross, however. One involved a nurse who worked with people with dementia. Nurses were not allowed to wear necklaces. They were possibly going to be grabbed as they dangled, and also unsanitary. The complaining nurse demanded her right to wear a cross necklace. The hospital said no, but you can have a lapel pin or earrings. She's been screaming ever since.The other involved a flight attendant who wanted to wear a cross necklace. The company said no, but she could wear earrings or a brooch. She's suing for a necklace.

yeah, see - to me - that's just daft. They're not having their human, civil or religious rights violated. There's no religion that I know of that requires a symbol of the faith be displayed via a specific type of jewellery, except possibly Sikhism, which - IIRC - requires the faithful to wear a small symbolic knife on a necklace. There may be others (and there are ones that have requirements for certain types of clothing,) but I'm pretty sure Christianity isn't one of them.This kind of selfishness - and that's what it is, really - trends to piss me off a bit. These women aren't wanting to wear necklaces because it's a religious requirement, but because they apparently like necklaces better. But in trying to enforce their taste preference by claiming its a religious requirement, they make it harder for the next person - who perhaps had a legitimate grievance - to be taken seriously.

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 28150
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby mimi » Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:39 am







Currently BBC iPlayer TV programmes are available to play in the UK only, but all BBC iPlayer Radio programmes are available to you. Why?





If you are in the UK and see this message please read this advice.





Go to the BBC iPlayer Radio homepage


I can't get the video to work - it keeps giving me an "only available in UK" error.



I didn't try the add-on yet. I remember reading about it here.





Hola Unblocker Gives You Access to iPlayer, Netflix, Pandora, Hulu, and More Regardless of Region





Chrome/Firefox: Hola Unblocker is a browser extension that removes region locks and allows you to watch BBC iPlayer, Netflix, Hula, Pandora, and more regardless of where you live. It doesn't require any set up and works right out of the box.





We've seen a few ways to circumvent region-locking, including, changing your DNS server, VPN, and easy to use services like Tunnelbear. Hola Unblocker makes the whole process even easier. Just install the extension, and Hola Unblocker does the rest. You don't need to reboot or change any setting in your browser. Currently, Hola supports Hulu, Netflix, Pandora, BBC iPlayer, iTV Player, CBS, and Fox.

Like I said, I haven't tried it yet. I just forgot about it.

User avatar
Welsh Dragon
Posts: 2810
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:29 pm

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Welsh Dragon » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:03 am

[offtopic]Thanks Mimi - Hola Unblock seems to work and you may end up saving me a few dollars![/offtopic]

User avatar
gupwalla
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:57 pm

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby gupwalla » Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:27 am

I guess my approach to the question is this - religious rights are introverted and human rights are extroverted. Start muddling that distinction and I'll start moving towards the human rights end of the spectrum, because you're all of a sudden involving other people.An extreme example: female circumcision. Practitioners will say that it is a religious, cultural thing and the rest of us should respect religious freedom and mind our own business. But what about the girls? If they aren't making an informed personal choice for themselves then it can't really be religious freedom. It's a dictate of society. In US legal terms, it's moved beyond the free expression clause and into establishment territory.(I've got issues with male circumcision as well - the medical consequences are much less severe, and it's possibly helpful in preventing some obscure diseases - but the principles are indistinguishable. An infant can't give meaningful consent to permanent life-altering surgery. The male case is harder for westerners to grapple with, for societal reasons.)

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 11504
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Eastern West Coast

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby ZekeB » Mon Jan 13, 2014 10:52 am

(I've got issues with male circumcision as well - the medical consequences are much less severe, and it's possibly helpful in preventing some obscure diseases - but the principles are indistinguishable. An infant can't give meaningful consent to permanent life-altering surgery. The male case is harder for westerners to grapple with, for societal reasons.)

The principles are completely different. Female circumcision is actually a clitorectomy and is done to keep the woman from feeling pleasure. She becomes nothing more than the object of a man's relief. It's just another thing done in the name of religion that allows one person to have more control over another.

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 10125
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Should human rights always outweigh religious rights?

Postby Suranis » Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:03 am

Its not really religion as such. It's actually to do with society and societal norms. Its practiced in various forms all around the middle east and parts of Africa, and it's done by members of every religion.Its like the Burka. The Burka was actually the dress of a rather extreme Aphgan tribe that was forced on the rest of Aphgan society when the Taliban took over. People might claim that the Higab is an important part of the mulsim religion, but its actually people exporting middle eastern dress norms to the rest of the world and cloaking it in the guise of religion. Hell, classical greek women wore Higabs and that was 1500 years before the onset of Islam and 1000 before christianity.
Have you tried the Internet? It's made out of millions of people missing the point of everything and then getting angry about it.


Return to “Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests