Are Human Rights “Subversive” to the current “Society of States”?
In befitting with the affirmation accepted as accountable of address in this essay, this Writer intends to accompany a aisle of thought-process guided by what is perceived as a radical-sounding affirmation by Mark R. Amstutz, a Professor of Political Science at Wheaton College, Illinois, USA. Allegedly, Professor Mark R. Amstutz claimed that Human Rights are “Subversive” to the International Status Quo – The accepted accompaniment of a “Society of States”.
Whether or not Amstutz absolutely fabricated such a claim, and if he did, is he serious? He must accept accurate and well-founded bases in adage so.
For the purpose of this essay, I would like to be directed in my altercation by the following questions: 1) What does Amstutz beggarly in his declared claim?; 2) Am I agreeable to it?; 3) Either way, what is my stand?; 4) Is the declared abeyant abolishment a good affair or not?
AMSTUTZ’S PROFESSIONAL PROFILE
In his book, The Healing of Nations: The Affiance and Limits of Political Forgiveness (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2005), Professor Mark R. Amstutz posed a claiming to the International Community which to him would tend to focus their efforts mostly on imputing chastening amends and castigating accomplishments to accomplished political offenses. And in accustomed out their strategies, they would use their assets and exhaust efforts in a advance of activity that would alone aggravate, widen, and aggravate alike more the gap amid the affronted and the behind parties. To Amstutz, the appropriate, effective, and abiding access should be by way of alleviation justice.
Simply put, what Amstutz appears to beggarly is to breach the barrier and arch the gap by giving allowances and alms of incentives to offenders, while affective them to come out of their aggressive stance and acknowledgment into orderliness and peaceful co-existence with the blow of the freedom-loving populace.
Professor Amstutz’s axial altercation in his book as quoted by Eric Brahm (Conflict Research Consortium, 2005) is that “The best active and able way of reckoning with accomplished aggregate offenses is by carefully gluttonous to advance political healing through adaptation based on moral rehabilitation of antagonists”. With that contention, Amstutz, a Political Scientist, exhibits an angel of actuality a Moralist, too. Furthermore, Amstutz is not alone able as a Political Scientist and a dedicated Moralist, he additionally appears to be a Minister of Gospel Truth. In his thesis, Animal Rights and the Affiance of Political Forgiveness (Wheaton College, IL, 2004), he wrote, “Forgiveness addresses austere wrongs by calling on transgressors to accost and acknowledge moral accountability and to apologize through the absolute affiance of not repeating the angry activity again. For their part, victims burden from avengement and release debtors from some or all of the adapted punishment. By auspicious such actions, forgiveness fosters a ambience that encourages the moral face-lifting of bodies and the transformation of acrimony into accepted solidarity”.
ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Now, why would Amstutz authorize Animal Rights as “Subversive” to the current state of “Society of States”? My able assumption is that his compassionate on the meaning and faculty of what Animal Rights means, is a apple altered from the common people’s conception. For sure, there are as abounding definitions of Animal Rights as there are assorted advocates angry for their corresponding rights, be it male, female, third sex, minors, juniors, chief citizens, black, white, brown, chicken race, etc.
For a better compassionate of Animal Rights in its applied sense, today’s common people can apprentice from the statements of the two candidates for US Presidency. Senator John McCain is quoted as saying, “We are Americans. We authority ourselves to humane standard of analysis no amount how awfully angry or abominable they may be…We angle for a lot added than that in the world: a moral mission, one of abandon and democracy, and human rights at home and abroad. We are bigger than the terrorists, and we will win…
The adversary we action has no account for animal activity or animal rights…These are ethics that distinguish us from our enemies”(Human Rights First, July 25, 2005).
For his part, Senator Barack Obama said, “To body a better, freer world, we must first behave in agency that reflect the appropriateness and aspirations of the American People. This agency catastrophe the practices of aircraft abroad prisoners in the asleep of night to be tortured in abroad countries, of detaining bags after allegation or trial, of maintaining a arrangement of abstruse prisons to bastille bodies above the ability of law”(“Renewing American Leadership”, July/August, 2007).
In ablaze of the accepted apperception of Animal Rights as reflected through the statements of the two presidentiables, McCain and Obama, I see no bright acumen to call Human Rights as subversive, no amount how able the appellation may be. Although Human Rights may not be as absolute with advertence to the accepted of the Moralist and Evangelist in Amstutz, but there is about no doubt, endemic is one of commutual role in the accepted aspiration of bodies in all walks of activity to co-exist in accord and to alive a life ashore on the Principles of The Golden Rule.
The Healing of Nations: The Affiance and Limits of Political Forgiveness by Mark R.
Amstutz, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2005
Human Rights and the Affiance of Political Forgiveness, by Mark R. Amstutz, Wheaton
College, Illinois, 2004
Universal Declaration of Animal Rights, U.N., December 10, 1948
Human Rights First Web Site: How to End Torture and Cruel Treatment, a adapt for
the abutting US Administration, Oct. 2008
Order a unique copy of this paper