Should human rights be extended even to those who violate them?

Asked by: Ansuman1998
  • For what purpose?

    I don't view punishment as justifiable in its own right, rather it should seek to achieve a goal; whether this is to prevent others from committing the crime (by consistently enforcing our laws we give them strength/meaning) or to keep the criminal from repeat his crime (e.G. Prison), the punishment should have a constructive purpose. In other words, I am of the belief (I am aware many disagree with me on this) that punishment is not justified because somebody did something wrong, but rather because it is beneficial to society.

    To not grant someone their fundamental human rights seems to be a very harsh punishment with little constructive purpose or societal benefit.

    Additionally, all humans have an intrinsic value simply by being human; to revoke their human rights is to claim that their actions have made them less valuable than a human. I do not believe this is true, nor is it an ethical way to execute "justice". A pickpocket is no less a human than an upstanding citizen, who is likewise no more a human than a mass murder. Human rights are, almost by definition, rights we maintain despite our actions, beliefs, etc.

  • That's the definition

    To define human rights as something to be taken away under exorbitant circumstances is dangerous. The very definition of a right implies that it cannot be abridged under ANY circumstances. Violating human rights is of course horrible but abridging them under any circumstances circumvents their very purpose for existence. So in the end no. Do not abridge human rights under any circumstances.

  • I don't think they should be extended to people who violate the rights of others ?

    Never should be the human rights be extended to those who violate the same rights of others, and why so ? Its because human rights gain their meaning more from humanity than from individual humans, contrary to popular belief. Whenever a person is violating the rights of others, he is putting himself against the humanity, as if in a war. So if he does so, how come he has an entitlement of human and his rights ?

    This was my perception of this topic. I would love to have anyone oppose me on this stand and draw me into an intriguing debate !

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.