Would you consider Food and Water to be a Human Right?

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I ask this question in lieu of a news story which asks the very same question.

www.spur.asn.au...

The above link is a link to an open letter addressed to "Director of Human Rights Watch".

Here is a portion of the letter:


For people in developing countries, the basic human rights would be food, water and shelter and a job so that they can pay for food, water and shelter. The bogus HR organisations should stop being the mouth piece for terrorists and should work towards providing food, water and shelter and jobs for all humans. If they do that they can shed the ‘bogus’ image and become genuine HR organisations.


Now this smacks of socialism.

Yet it does raise a question of fundemental importance concerning the times we now live in.

Would you consider Food and Water a Human right in line with say, the Right to Bear arms?

Or in line with the Right to Pursue Happiness?

Can a person have the right of the pursuit of happyness if he is hungery and thirsty?

Apparently these persons from Sri Lanka believe that basic food and water is a Human Right.

It gets you thinking!




posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I understand that the authors of the open letter may be crossing over some line.

This may need to be reposted in RATS.

But the main question that arose to me was the human rights question.
Nothing else.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   
So what smacks of socialism? ........... A basic human need of food and water!

I bet you are American. You all have inbred fear of social policies. Get a life.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
l would be inclined to say that as a human race we have all voted no on the above question with our actions as well as with our inaction.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Let me put it this way: I consider equal access to available food and water a human right, although food is obviously a market commodity, although I believe society should feed the poor and give them chance. Smacks of socialism... because it is a social policy, a country that dosen't take care of it's poor is doomed. But we don't have to have 5 year agricultural plans... As for water people should only pay a token fee which covers the infrastructure and is just high enough so people don't abuse it by doing stupid things like washing the car every day or filling up the swimming pool every week.

I also believe that actions done against the supply of food and water should be considered crimes against humanity and we should take a closer look at just what the hell is really behind this looming food crysis. With some investigation this would put a sizeable portion of the elite in jail.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Do you consider the air you breathe a human right?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Zepherian
 


I agree entirely..

ACCESS to food and water is a basic human right.

Destruction or limitation of food and water is a crime against our laws of life.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Currently, in the country I live in, in order to eat and drink water, you simply need to apply at some goverment office inorder to get a check with witch to spend of rent, food and utilities.

I personaly believe in this right although I do get angry from time to time when i am fixing something for someone who is doing this on the goverments dime. (or peoples dime if you look at it tht way)

Yes..it is a form of Socialism. There are a lot if "isms" that contain some good ideas. Maybe we can seperate the cream from the milk?!



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   


I also believe that actions done against the supply of food and water should be considered crimes against humanity and we should take a closer look at just what the hell is really behind this looming food crysis.
reply to post by Zepherian
 



Very true. Your statement brings the water crisis in Peru to mind. The powers that be tried to "privatise" the water of a certain community. All the residents protested against the measure and the investors had to back down.

The general populace of that area of the world truly believed that they had a right to their water.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I just find by reading ATS that most Americans deem socialism or social policies as dirty words and lump them in with Communism, whereas the way the US system works is actually the ''unconventional'' way of living in this world and therefore in the minority.

Air, Food and Water = Homeostasis - which are the four crucial basics to human survival and so are EVERYONE'S basic human right to have, no matter how rich or poor you are - I suggest you read Maslows Hierarchy of Needs.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by whiteraven
 


I want free food.. I want free drink...I want free transportation.. I want free schooling... I want free clothes... I want free t.v. I dont want to work.... Oh.. and I want a woman to be at my beckon call, just for pleasure, not companionship.. I dont need that.. so Im not asking for a lot.. there are a lot of rich people that make enough money for those of us.. who dont want to anything...besides food ,, water.. clothes.. transportation.. schooling.. radio.. t.v.. are a human right in todays life... oh.. geeeee.. I forgot all about health care.. Im not in the best of shape... sitting around all day...drinking beer.. eating cheetos..



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Yes, everybody has the right to basic needs such as food, water, and shelter. The real question is...who should be obligated to provide it? The government or the individual?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Wotan
 


I agree with you. Food, water, clothing, shelter has been the definition of the basic necessities of life since Aristotle.

As far as it being a right, it would seem that anything you consider your right, you would not deprive to another person.

The difference then is between necessities and desires, i.e. having cabbage to eat is a necessity, where lobster is a desire.

(You should read Aristotle's Metaphysics.)



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Wotan
 



no matter how rich or poor you are - I suggest you read Maslows Hierarchy of Needs.


Yes, I have referenced Maslow many times in my life.

This is why I posted the tie in with the bill of rights. Can a man pursue happyness when he is hungry and thirsty?

Or the reverse of it could be...If a man is thirsty and hungry HE WILL pursue happyness...happyness being a full tummy.

Are we living in the reverse or should we pursue the idea of provideing food and water to every living person on this earth?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SantaClaus
 


Yes, At least in America you get that in any detainment no matter what your crime was. But, hey with water-boarding in the recent past you never know they just might starve people to get them to tell the truth or lie to stay alive!



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Anyone who doesn't think that access to food and drinkable water is a basic human right needs to get off my planet. Shelter can be debatable because there are certain places in the world where I'd be more than happy to live under the stars, or build my own.

No one should be denied access to the basic necessities of life for any reason.



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by garyo1954
 


Hey garyo1954 thanks for turning me on to the Aristotle metaphysics link.

Here is a quote below that rocked my mindset for a bit


Early scholars of the Metaphysics were Arabic, who relied on Arabic translations from early Syriac translations from the Greek (see Medieval Philosophy). The book was unknown in the Latin West until the twelfth century. For a period, scholars relied on Latin translations of the Arabic. These were sometimes inaccurate, having been through so many stages of translation.


unknown in Latin West until 12th century..>WOW..and just what happend around that time in the West!

Anyhow thanks for posting.



[edit on 16-7-2008 by whiteraven]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 09:02 PM
link   

It is impossible for such things as food and water to be rights.



Why? Because, of course, they don't come from you. Look at what your true rights are. Free speech, exercise religion, bear arms (more on this)... They're all things contained within yourself when you are born.

Are you born with the ability to get food and water? Obviously not. They don't come from you; they are not God-given (whatever you think God is) nor intrinsic properties of your being. They are, if you think everyone deserves them, entitlements.

Now, more on the right to keep and bear arms. This is the right to have weapons, if you so choose. But is it the right to be given weapons? No. You have the right to keep weapons, but you are not entitled to them. There's a fundamental difference here between a right an an entitlement.

A right comes from within yourself; an entitlement is something you deserve from someone else.

That's why whenever you hear someone name food, water, or even employment as rights, you should respond with anger. Why? Because the implications are destructive and, from my perspective, downright evil. It directly implies that all of your "rights" come from others - from the government. And they don't. Something the government should give you is an entitlement - and you're reliant on the government for it. But your rights come from no one but yourself as an individual.

And don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

[edit on 16-7-2008 by Johnmike]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   


It is impossible for such things as food and water to be rights


So are you saying our rights as Humans are only what is given to us at birth...nothing more. nothing less?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by whiteraven
So are you saying our rights as Humans are only what is given to us at birth...nothing more. nothing less?

Sort of. The distinction is whether or not you're reliant on someone else for its existence. As in, it's yours through the act of being born, not through the existence of some external entity like a government. Otherwise, it's an entitlement (which I rarely believe in, but that's another story).

[edit on 16-7-2008 by Johnmike]





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join