Can We Have Universal Justice and Law?
Submitted by Dr. Laina Farha... on Sat, 07/04/2009 - 06:05
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionDr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
We hear so much talk about “world opinion” and “universal values,” concepts that may deceive us into thinking these things are real. They are not real. There is no “world opinion” other than the views of the General Assembly of the UN, an assembly that gives all member nations an equal vote. The problem is that the representatives of such nations work in a United Nations that operates under western democratic rules, although most members are the elites of countries not at all democratic. Furthermore, their views do not even represent those of their less privileged countrymen, who mostly get their news coverage from the propaganda ministries of their countries.
On December 10, 1948, the General Assembly of the UN adopted and proclaimed the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” They then called upon all member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and “to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read, and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.”
Can you imagine such member states as Saudi Arabia or the raft of dictatorships then (and still) members of the UN preaching “basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled?” Could “right to life and liberty; freedom of expression; equality before the law; social, cultural, and economic rights be promoted in countries that routinely enslave women, execute homosexuals, and torture and execute political or religious dissidents? They didn’t then, and they do not now promote such values. Today they argue that these values are not theirs, and they have come out with a new set of “human rights” that they prefer.
What the UN promoted as “entitlements and rights” are really ideals. There are no international rights. Dictatorships (political and religious) do not believe that civil and political rights are anything other than disloyalty to the state, for which there is severe punishment.
There is no agreement on what “freedom” is. Marxists claimed that the important freedoms were freedom from hunger and joblessness, or freedom from anarchy and lawlessness. All other freedoms are a danger to “the people.”
What kind of entitlement is the right to education? Even such developing countries as India and Pakistan have little to no public education, and what passes for education in many countries is little more than memorized religious indoctrination (the Madrassas in Pakistan and Afghanistan). Girls do not have “entitlement” to education is such places.
In promoting “equality before the law,” what law? Many countries do not have written law codes, but are governed by edicts or clerical “law,” which certainly does not give women or minorities equal access to protection. And what constitutes “minority” protection? What kind of minority? Are women, homosexuals, religious or political dissidents minorities?
How do you enforce “the right to food,” when Sudan, Burma, or Somali warlords prevent food aid for their starving? Burma would not even permit food aid to come in after their country was devastated by a tsunami.
How do you have “humanitarian intervention” when the UN must recognize the sovereignty of nation states? And who will intervene? There is no international army – nor would such a force be a force for good.
Protection from genocide, one of the most important ideals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has only been executed under U.S. intervention (with NATO cooperation). The UN has never been effective in this issue. It cannot be, considering how it is organized.
The best we can do is recognize that the Universal Declaration is an ideal, and only those countries sufficiently developed to have these values enshrined in their laws care about them. We must not pretend that these values are universal, but we certainly can use the bully pulpit of such popular media as soap operas, comic books, and free radio to promote and educate the world. These are ideals badly needed in the world, but we have a long way to go.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is an historian, lecturer, and author who also writes for the Santa Cruz Sentinel. You may contact her at Lfarhat102@aol.com or http://www.globalthink.net/.
It is important to achieve a
It is important to achieve a balance between universal values and national sovereignty. Of course, since most if not all, of the Islamic world is home to governments who have violated the human rights of the people living within them, then that national sovereignty goes out the window. I don't want the United Nations to become the centre of one world government that controls everybody at their whims, but I don't want these rife abuses of human rights to go on. It's a travesty that the Pact of Umar is still being practised today in Saudi Arabia, that gang rapes are rife in Pakistan, that what is tantamount to slavery still occurs in Dubai and parts of West Africa, that non-Muslim minorities, women, homosexuals, intellectuals, and dissidents must suffer across the Islamic world. I guess intervention is the only answer. As Edmund Burke said, "All it takes for evil to take place is for good men to do nothing."
Many thanks for this great
Many thanks for this great article by Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman.
Today the only remaining obstacle to everyone enjoying equal human rights is Islam. It teaches that only pure Arab Muslim men have equal rights. Everyone else is only fit to be their lowly slaves. Where Islam reigns, tyranny rules supreme.
If it were not so, Muslim countries would be beacons of freedom and enlightenment, not the hell-holes that they are. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
I am a Muslim, non-Arab, I'm
I am a Muslim, non-Arab, I'm a lawyer who specialises in human rights law in the UK and I can assure you, nothing that I have read in Islam states that only pure Arab Muslim men have equal rights.
So stop chattin crap!
Kabirlaw states: "I am a
Kabirlaw states: "I am a Muslim, non-Arab, I’m a lawyer who specialises in human rights law in the UK and I can assure you, nothing that I have read in Islam states that only pure Arab Muslim men have equal rights.
So stop chattin crap!"
Well, then let Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt et.al. simply adopt the U.S. 'Bill of Rights'. Then we will stop 'chattin crap'.
After all it only requires freedom of religion, speech, press, gun ownership, and a few other good things.
In fact most of the U.S. 'Bill of Rights' are not even available in the UK. How many guns do you own? How many 'hate crime' bills are on the books of the U.K.?
Islam is not compatible with 'human rights'!
There is no agreement on what
There is no agreement on what “freedom” is.
I don't agree with this, its typical argument which Muslims say when they try to argue against our law, and that part of their freedom is to have their own laws.
In fact its a Relativist fallacy, even a Muslim philosopher (Ali Sina, that ancient one not our Ali :) realized that in his quote:
"Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned"
Freedom is freedom and in fact with rights we are all born with, others can only take them out! And Muslims exactly do this, they even do not allow to all borned Muslims leave Islam.
This is a great statement describes why law must be objective not subjective (Sharia):
"Law is to be objective because if law cannot be applied rationally, law cannot be applied universally."
Objective law which is part of every born man is then called Natural law, UN bill of rights basically describe it, however here is a good blog for anyone who is more interested in ethics of natural law
http://moneypolicy.blogspot.com/2009/05/why-capitalistic-greed-rocks-and...
#3. kabirlaw Says: “I am a
#3. kabirlaw Says:
“I am a Muslim, non-Arab, I’m a lawyer who specialises in human rights law in the UK and I can assure you, nothing that I have read in Islam states that only pure Arab Muslim men have equal rights."
Be real - you are the one who should stop chattin crap. I stand by my comment #2 above about pure Arab men only having equal rights.
Never mind the fine words of your Prophet in his Sermon on the Mount Speech about a non-Arab being the equal of an Arab. Not a word of it was true. It was all made up by Tabari centuries later to make Mahomed sound just as noble as Isa and his original Sermon on the Mount. Tabari even bragged about it. Do your research.
So let's face harsh reality about supposed real equality among Muslim Arabs by asking ourselves this simple question "When in Islam's 1400 hundred year history has a non-Arab ever been an imam of either of the 2 Grand Mosques in Arabia" Do you actually believe that even a very pious and learned Pakistani or Bengali or (gasp) a black African today, or tomorrow, or ever, will ever be one? The closest any of these ineligible candidates will ever get to this prestigious position will be cleaning the male-Arab-only imam's private, marble and gold toilet.
Face facts. Islam is nothing but sheer Arab imperialism posing as a religion. Their backward tribal customs are passed off as Sunnah to sweeten the bitter pill. Where is your pride? Stop being their docile slave and be a real man.
#6 True what you said. Islam
#6 True what you said. Islam is pure Arabic ImperiaLISM. Africans change their names to Arab ones instead of an African one. in America they are renamed Muhammad or Abdul or some Arabic name. Yet they claim Islam is a Black Man's religion. How insaNE. A religion that calls black ugly, nappy headed, pug nosed slaves. White non Arabs are called mamluks. all blaCKS are abeeds and cursed for hellfire. Dumb Africans and blacks. The Chinese muslims were spared as Mo was afraid of them and not until Arabs took African slaves to China did the Chinese started hating Blacks. the low life Arabs need a bath.
Kabir it was in Tabari that
Kabir it was in Tabari that said ARABS ARE THE BEST OF ALL MANKIND. tHAT LEAVES U OUT LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL.
#3 WHERE ARE THE HUMAN RIGHT
#3 WHERE ARE THE HUMAN RIGHT IN iSLAM. oNLY mUSLIMS ARE INNOCENT. Man go to Saudi Arabia and hlp them with human rights as infidels in Uk are not human remember. We dont want Islam's right as there are none. Pure Arabs can only marry pure Arab women in Sa and in PaLESTINE African Muslims are not allowed to marry Arab women. the arab men honor killed an arab woman who married a black africaN. yET YOU THINK iSLAM IS SO NICE. You must be a wheat man.l0000000000l.
Excellent article.
Excellent article.
When muslims will become
When muslims will become human mentally, although they are physically human then we will have proper human rights in the world.
Non-arab muslims are still suffering from this cultural colonization of arabs. daily they face mecca with there ass in the air and say we are idiots and thank arabs to come to our land, abuse our ancestors , destroyed our historical culture and imposed this barbarism. Still the non-aran muslims force there women in hijab, give there daughters to fellow muslims. The arab muslims use the non-arab muslims and never marry permanently.
The african muslims were used as slaves and they mutiliated there sex organs, so that no african muslims in arab lands.
The pakistan muslims used to think and still think bangladesh muslims as filth.
Raisin Head, Could you
Raisin Head,
Could you please stop posting in caps. This tends to alienate, rather than persuade your audience.
Also, Malcolm X did finally begin adopting a different stance to the "white devils" after he went on the Hajj, and left the Nation of Islam.
#12 Please forgive me,
#12 Please forgive me, sometimes i hit the wrong key. I can change the keys but Islam cannot stand up right. Right in Islam is killing sex and power any way necessary.
Malcolm X was a half white black man wih red hair and he still hated white people. As quiet as it is kept Malcolm X, who we used to call Detroit Red, called one of my heroes a "N" just before he was killed by a white man. He wanted to kill all whites or black who refused to accept Islam. Hajj was an old Arab custom, not Islamic but was stolen from the pagan Arabs called Sabeans and every other custom Muslims have today was taken from Judiams, Roman CHristianity and the Dharmic religions of the time. Even Friday Muslims holy day was a Sabeans holy day. Malcolm and Farrahkan and Elijah Poole Muhammad all were half white black men with dark skinned mules asthey still have today.
I dont intent to alienate but inform and tell the truth. Believe me if Jesus said kill Jews to spread his word I would not accept him. But he didnt, but mo did.
The Nation of Islam has many sect that left as did Muhammad. Shia, Sunni, BH, and many more.Muhammad was just called Muslims, not a named brand.
aspacia: Also, Malcolm X did
aspacia:
Also, Malcolm X did finally begin adopting a different stance to the “white devils” after he went on the Hajj, and left the Nation of Islam.
Yeah he wanted to spread Islam to the white people so there would be peace between the races. I wonder how he would have responded if nonmuslims did not want to convert to Islam ( but did want to live in racial harmony with each other ).
“I am a Muslim, non-Arab, I’m
“I am a Muslim, non-Arab, I’m a lawyer who specialises in human rights law in the UK and I can assure you, nothing that I have READ in Islam states that only pure Arab Muslim men have equal rights."
Here we go again, even the elephant can enter his mouth. Notice the word "read" here. Ck..ck..ck.. We live in real world not books. And one more thing mr. lawyer, why don't you do something about your jihadis brothers (especially arabs) who don't know about this "human rights" you're blabbering about.
Ah, i remember. There are muslim lawyers specialized to defend muslim regardless of what they do/did. They even defended terrorist who bombed bali couple years ago. HHmmm it seems that this kind of lawyer only care about muslim, not the victims.
[...] Can We Have Universal
[...] Can We Have Universal Justice and Law? | Faith Freedom International [...]