I had vowed to write at least twice a week on this site but i failed. Basically, due to some time constraints (sometimes mas gugustuhin ko na lang matulog kesa magsulat) I was not able to put down here some of my thoughts. Anyway, from now on, I would try to write something here that could be pondered on.
Today I am writing about human rights.
Where does it exactly begin and where does it end? The usual answer I would get from people was :as long as you are not violating other person's rights. This answer is some kind of hazy because how would one know when another's right is being violated? I mean is there an inherent concept of "feeling that you are violating somebody else's right"? What the hell was that supposed to mean?
Further, some people might say: you are violating someone if they are hurt. Okay, given that the other people are hurt, how would one know that they are? Some would just prefer to shut up and let things pass.
There are concrete examples that our concept of human rights are as vague as our understanding of how universe must have started. We have theories but one of them is concretely validated.
Take for an example: euthanasia. I know I am crossing some serious grounds here. But I would like to continue anyway. In one of the series I used to watch, the patient was given the prerogative to end her life (BTW, the star was Sara Gilbert and I liked her more in TBBT). Two doctors signed the papers consenting to her request. She had cancer and was experiencing a lot of pain. I do not know if in real-life that state has already legalized Euthanasia. My argument lies on the thought that at that make-believe setting, Euthanasia comprise the basic humnan rights of a person... choosing to end her life. I do not contest the morality of such act, I am just going to argue: does it not (euthanasia) fall in the very definition of human right? One has not to hurt anyone in anyway (althoguh some people may argue that the relatives of the one the patient would be hurt emotionally, but to think it deeper, they were hurt because of the parting and not the act, which is euthanasia, itself.
Another one was same sex marriage. My housemate and I were talking about it last week, on one of those days when the elctricity was out and there was nothing to do around the house)... gays and lesbians are basically people, who has every right to be happy. If marrying one another is what would make them happy, why the society is not giving in? AGAIN, I am not contesting the morality of this act. Marriage is an instiutution that is deeply revered by everyone of us, including me. My only question is that: does it not also fall in the very definition of human rights? Homos would not be violating any of our rights either. We are just against the act because it was against our beliefs.
I am no expert in what is right and what is wrong. My own standards are not too impeccable that I may have the right to shout all over and preach the good stuff, no. I am just a simple person asking: what is human rights? And until it was answered, really answered, I would not cease to ask that question.
*To myself: Utopia, you are still far from reality.