Universal Declaration of Rights
Critically assess the case that values are relative to culture and that therefore the International Bill of Rights has no applicability in some countries.
Cultural differences are evident throughout all societies through religious beliefs, traditions or lifestyle choices. The International Bill of rights therefore cannot be applied to all cultures due to its opposing ideologies, however the most basic level of human rights are found necessary in order to protect human life. Evidently, cultural relativism restricts judgement of alternative cultural practices. As a result, cultural differences must be tolerated and a universal body has no right to determine what is right and wrong in a society. Through specific cultures, cultural traditions are highlighted, many that appear to violate basic human rights. As a result of these alternate rights and practices differ it is difficult of establish a universal set of rights that observes the unique beliefs and ideologies of minorities around the world.
Approved in 1966, the International Bill of Rights consists of two covenants that attempt to represent a revised set of rights in the aftermath of the Second World War. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, together make up the International Bill of Rights. The creation of the International Bill of Rights was fraught with confrontation that lead to the division of two separate covenants due to pressure from the US and its allies. The immediate implementation of political and civil rights and the progressive nature of economic and social were thought of as necessary rights to include in the International Bill of Rights (Pollis & Schwab 2006). Referred to as a hierarchy of rights, certain values were believed more important through the perspective of western society. The US was seen to prioritise the civil and political rights above economic, social and cultural rights, which
Cultural differences are evident throughout all societies through religious beliefs, traditions or lifestyle choices. The International Bill of rights therefore cannot be applied to all cultures due to its opposing ideologies, however the most basic level of human rights are found necessary in order to protect human life. Evidently, cultural relativism restricts judgement of alternative cultural practices. As a result, cultural differences must be tolerated and a universal body has no right to determine what is right and wrong in a society. Through specific cultures, cultural traditions are highlighted, many that appear to violate basic human rights. As a result of these alternate rights and practices differ it is difficult of establish a universal set of rights that observes the unique beliefs and ideologies of minorities around the world.
Approved in 1966, the International Bill of Rights consists of two covenants that attempt to represent a revised set of rights in the aftermath of the Second World War. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, together make up the International Bill of Rights. The creation of the International Bill of Rights was fraught with confrontation that lead to the division of two separate covenants due to pressure from the US and its allies. The immediate implementation of political and civil rights and the progressive nature of economic and social were thought of as necessary rights to include in the International Bill of Rights (Pollis & Schwab 2006). Referred to as a hierarchy of rights, certain values were believed more important through the perspective of western society. The US was seen to prioritise the civil and political rights above economic, social and cultural rights, which