The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (URHR) is a lot different than older documents like The Declaration of Independents. It applies more to the modern more globalized world instead of just one country or domestic issues. For example it mentions that one has the right to enter and leave their country at free will. This was never mentioned in the declaration of independence. The URHR, since it is a document that pertains to multiple countries it also deals with a lot more issues than The Declaration of Independence. Also since society has gotten more complicated than it was when The Declaration of Independence.

N. Korea

One other community that needs a Declaration of Independence is North Korea. They obviously need one for several reasons. The main one is that they are all victims of a dictatorship. The declaration would help add the people's voices to the government which would make the whole system more equal. Also the rights of the North Koreans would be put into place better. They would be able to pursue a career and happiness without interference from the government.

Declaration of Rights

A society in todays world that needs a declaration of rights is the Syrian population. They have been brutally attacked by their government who's job is to protect them. This situation is fairly similar to when the crown was ruling over the colonies in America. In both instances the ruling government abused their power to maintain their power. To keep any type of revolution under control the government would attack their own citizens to stay in control. In Syria the ruling power is shelling it's citizens and in the 1700's the crown attacked the colonies when they declared independence.

Documents

In our group we discussed the differences between the woman's rights document and the Declaration of Independents. We found out that there are more similarities than differences. The only real difference was that in the declaration of independence, the writers wanted to be equal to the british and in the women's rights document, the writers were looking to be equal to men. Now for the similarities. In both documents, they list the rights that each party deserves. For example in the declaration of independence, it describes mans right to the pursuit of happiness, which means the right to be able to make a living. And in the women's rights document it states that women should not be treated differently then men. 

Elections

Should candidates who are running for president be judged for what they did in their teenage years? Yes they should to a certain extent. For example Mitt Romney. He is running for president and when he was younger and in high school he would bully other kids. For example he made fun of a boy with long blond hair. Another instance was when he said "atta girl" during his gym class to a boy who later turned out to be gay. I think it would be completely inappropriate for Romney to be elected with his past of homophobic comments.

The Underwear Bomber

Should we be worried about another Underwear bomber? The answer is we should be prepared. In report on NPR they were talking about the origins of the Christmas Day bomber and the one that was discovered by a Saudi double agent. Both Bombs were made by the same guy. And although the reporter hated to admit he said that the creator of the bombs was a "genius". He made both bombs without any metal components and incorporated them into a pair of briefs. He also put bombs into computer cartridges. If it had not been for the U.S. and it's allies intelligence these bombs might have gone off. With all these unique bombs, it appears that the creator is Hell bent on blowing up a plane over U.S. airspace. That is why I think we should be prepared. Also other countries should be prepared as well. Our security can detect the bomb material but in some European Countries their security systems can not. This is a big problem if the bomber takes off in a European country and detonates over the U.S.

Sharia Family Laws

The Sharia Family Laws I found very interesting. Some laws I found very kind and I thought were definitely needed in a society. Other laws in the Family Laws I thought were a little ridiculous. For example one law I thought was absurd and completely disagree was an individual became an adult when they hit puberty. I disagree with the idea that when someone reaches puberty because even then they probably can not make make decisions for themselves. Another Law I thought was a little crazy was the law about a man could have four wives. They still need guidance from adults.  I mean having four wives in a marriage is a little insulting for every women involved. Some of Sharia Family Laws I did agree with were almost the rest of the Laws. They were very community oriented and people friendly. One law I thought was especially heartwarming was the one about how a community should take care of an orphaned child. I think it is incredible that that was a law and back then people were thinking about others.

Laws of Manu vs Mosaic Code

The Laws of Manu do not have a very strong connection to religion. They relate more to the social issues that faced them in their time. Also the text is a lot more simple than the Mosaic Code. It only states what needs to be said and does not provide any examples. In the Mosaic Code almost every law has an example. Also the Mosaic code has a law for almost everything. It has a law for what you should do if you see your brothers ox walking around free. It also describes the punishment for the laws and crimes described in the Mosaic code. Usually it's just the capital punishment death. In the laws of Manu the punishment fits the crime more. 

Should Socrates Escape?

Would it be right for Socrates to escape Roman custody for his crime of "corrupting the youth"? Let me remind you, Socrates was basically caught guilty of being cocky and spreading new ideas. He did not harm anyone. Socrates could have easily escaped the prison and no one would have really cared but he didn't. In our reading it was debated wether it would be just or right for him to escape prison. In my opinion it would be both. For example it was not just of Socrates's government to incarcerate him over corrupting the youth but they still did it. It was also not right of them to simply execute him either. In the end it was not just or right of socrates to be prosecuted. He definitely should have attempted to escape.

Roman Rights

In the time of the romans the Twelve Tables signified rights in many ways. They were made by people who were treated unfairly and they needed things to evened out. Basically the needed rights so they made something that today resembles in todays eyes rights. This text symbolizes the concept of rights because it puts all men (At this time women were considered property) under equal protection of the law. Today we consider this a crude form of rights. Of course this is no where near to what we have today. But back then this a huge advancement. Before the Twelve Tables were made Romans were being dominated by a monarchy with no regard to human rights. This is an extremely important historical event because this is one of the first instances of where a people unite and create their own laws, laws that benefit them not the king or his survival. 

Why was trade important for the Babylonians?

Trade was very important to the babylonians. First off, being one of the first civilizations there were very few goods being manufactured. Unlike today where all we have to do is go to a local drug store to get what we need to survive. For babylonians, usually one would have to go far out of their way to get the goods they desired. For example, they usually had to grow their own food or trade something valuable for someone else's food. If they didn't manage to grow their own food or trade something for it they would die. They had to trade to survive. This is why trading was so important. Important enough to be put in their laws. The laws would help people return bad or faulty trades that they made and if you wanted to do this you would have to have evidence to prove it. This last part would be for the benefit of the person who offered the trade.

Societal Values in Hammurabi's Code

In Hammurabi's code there are numerous social values. Two big ones are that trade should be fair and honesty and justice are very important. For the latter an example is that one has to have proof that the person they are accusing actually did the crime. This is mentioned a lot showing that this is very important in Hammurabi's society. This is also very important in the 21st century's society. Our judicial system requires that one must have evidence to prevail or go forth in a trial.
Another big value that was mentioned in Hammurabi's code was that trade should be fair and that you should be able to return the things you buy. For example in the code, it mentions that if you buy a slave and it gets sick, you can return it and get your money back. Slaves were one of the most traded and expensive goods in this society and if you were conned into buying an unhealthy slave then you would lose a lot of money. Hammurabi wanted to stop that so he put it in his document showing that this was a very important value to him.

Are rights real?

In history today we discussed rights. Are they real or are they just man made? After reading the passages in our reading I came to the conclusion that rights are one hundred percent man made. In nature there are no rights. Animals do not get to decide whether it is right for one animal to eat another it is just nature. If humans were wild animals nothing could stop one person from harming another. Since we are smarter, one day when someone was getting killed or harmed they thought that it was unfair and wrong. When other people started to agree with him they realized it was their right to not be harmed by other humans. This soon developed one of the most important aspects about us being human today.

Activists in Prison

Another interesting aspect of the film "Cry Freedom" was the long list of activists who died in prison during Apartheid. The whole list seemed very far fetched and fabricated. I mean even one suicide in prison is very questionable, especially if the prisoner has a history protesting against the government. But there were about several dozen accounts of apparent suicide which is one of the highest suicide rates in prisons for most countries.
Another sketchy detail about this list was the way the prisoners died. Most of the deaths, actually all of them seemed way to suspicious. Almost half the deaths were unexplained and left that way. Others were very far fetched. The one that stuck out to me the most was where the police said that someone died falling on a chair. That is just ridiculous. Others said a prisoner fell down seven flights of stairs or falling down the stairs. I think that the officers involved and their employers should have definitely been held responsible for what happened and that there were not enough repercussions.

Cry Freedom

When the South African police raided the black township in "Cry Freedom" I was slightly confused at first. It seemed unnecessary for the police to invade a harmless township. The police did not enter the area for a specific crime, they just entered and arrested whoever they could get their hands on. This seemed very illegal to me. First of all law enforcement can not just enter where they please. Second of all they can not just hit who ever they please with batons. That is cruel and unusual. The whole operation seemed like it had no purpose.
The whole thing seemed like some sort of war scenario where a major power is attempting to wipe out a minor power. This situation seems fairly similar to the one in Syria. The government is hurting it's own people. Granted in Syria more people are killed but there is still injustice.

French Shooting

Although the recent shooting in France are not entirely related to religion or what we have been doing in class I still believe that it is important to blog about. It began when a rogue self declared al Qaida member shot and killed three french paratroopers. Soon he was being hunted by the french government. He then continued his killing spree when he killed a rabbi and two hebrew school students. Both were children. This made national news causing a manhunt for this madman.

According to sources this man was on his own. His cause for the rampage was the unavenged deaths of Palestinian children who were killed by Israeli forces. The nation of palestine has stated that it completely disagrees with Merah's ways. 

This is a vague example of where religion creates something evil to happen in this world. But I do not think that is religion playing a role. I believe that Merah was just a sick minded person who needed an excuse to start a violent rampage. 

Religion: Good

Religion has caused many good and peaceful events in humanity's history. It has been a force of good in our world. For example, it has caused people to find meaning in the world. When someone is feeling bad about something from failing a test to losing a loved one, religion is always a way for people to vent or console themselves. It is an outlet and people find peace in it. With out religion, when someone is grieving or just sad it would be a little more difficult to be at peace.
Religion has also been good to humanity on a much more global scale. It has brought people together when  they have  been suppressed.  For example Martin Luther King Junior used religion to unite people under one cause. He did not unite people under him and then use is power over them for his personal reasons but brought them together under a much bigger cause. Using what King had learned about from religion from his father who was a pastor and his own ministry work he brought civil rights to America. These two widely different reasons are only the few on why religion has been a force of good in the world.

Religion: Evil

Is religion good or evil? Humanity has scene many horrible things happen that have been caused by religion. But humanity has also seen great good caused by religion. The question is: Is it more evil than good or more good than evil. The answer is neither of these. Religion is a medium that can be used for good or for bad. For example when humans have used religion for evil, the crusades. There was nothing pleasant or nice at all about the crusades. People in power just used it as an excuse to invade middle eastern countries for their resources. They told people in europe that is they fought for them in the crusades they would immediately get into heaven. No questions asked. Clearly the power religion had over everyone in that time frame was completely wrongly used by evil men in power.

The Inquisitors

What was the purpose of the inquisition? The inquisition was a police like organization where people were hired to investigate cases of heresy. When recruiting the inquisitors looked for smart, intelligent men that were faithfully Christian. They were also either Franciscan or Dominican because both were well educated, pious and mobile.
An inquisitors job was not to simply punish non-believers but to expose them and to get them to confess, repent or convert. Punishments would be to have a cross sewn onto ones clothing or be sent on a pilgrimage.  Only one in ten cases would result in execution. This would only happen if the defendant refused to repent or convert. This would also happen if someone was accused of heresy multiple times.
When first starting an inquisitor usually reviewed Gui's manual. Gui was a dominican inquisitor who spent nearly twenty five years conducting investigations. Basically the manual tells one what the procedure is when interrogating someone. Then it has a series of documents and after that it tells a history on modern day inquisitors.

Missionaries in Africa

What was the logic in sending Christian missionaries to Africa? There are a few answers to this question but the one answer that makes the most sense is the resources Africa had. Since Africa was not already occupied by Muslim government Christians saw this as an opportunity too gain some new territory and resources. 

With Islam having a fair amount of land mass Europe felt as though they were an enemy. Wanting to have an edge on Islam, Christianity wanted to get as much territory as possible so they sent missionaries to Africa. Their was no set ruler or form of Government of Africa so it was easy to infiltrate and convert as many people as they could. The more people converted the more territory the Christians received. With all this new land Christians also would have more resources. One of the more darker resources were slaves. Sometimes slave traders would accompany missionaries and help themselves to slaves. The new territory and resources were one of the main reasons missionaries would be sent to Africa.