GPERS – Human Rights, Universalism and Cultural Relativism

I believe the 30 basic human rights should be universal, regardless of culture, background or anything. Or at the least, there are few that should be considered fundamental and enforced to protect the people of a country. Looking at ‘the Girl in the River’ documentary as a case study, some human rights that were mentioned were: the Right to Life, Liberty and Personal Security; the Right to Marriage and Family; and Freedom from Torture.

Honour Killings – I have absolutely no intention of being offensive, but I feel that killing for honour is merely a way of getting rid of ‘the problem’ (the one who had brought shame to the family) even though there are other, better, ways to handle the situation. No one should have the right to take away another’s life for what ever reason. I understand where Saba’s father was coming from — the importance of family and honour, maintaining status in their society — but I still feel that honour is something that can be regained with time, but a life that has been taken away cannot be given back. There is no going back from killing. Yet, many still believe that this is still the way it should be. I recognise that this may be how they have been raised, and that many still accept the outcome of the situation. Even though people will have different morals and ethics, I still strongly believe that the right to life is universally essential. There’s no life for the rights to protect, without rights to protect life. I think the right to marriage and life ties in with the right to free will, and in some situations may be culturally relative. Everyone should be able to be allowed to marry, but the ability to choose will vary because of family, especially with parents. Considering the point Saba’s father made about having provided for Saba her whole life, I suppose parents should be able to express their opinion, but in the end it must be Saba’s choice because it is her life. If the whole family has strong opinions about going against her choice, there obviously is something wrong and they should be able to reason with each other. Misunderstanding should not lead to death. Sometimes the parents will have a say because they believe that their children won’t know any better, and it’s important to recognise that there are cultures that accept that. Altogether, I think there are (some of the 30 basic) rights violations that don’t become a problem until the people are obviously unhappy, at which point the government and the rest of society should be responsible for changing and adapting to the needs of the people and making sure that other human rights are not being violated. They are there to ensure the safety and happiness of the people. In the end, the community should trust in their system, (I suppose) with or without following the full set of basic human rights.