Protecting human rights shouldn’t be up for debate

Protecting human rights shouldn’t be up for debate

Commentary by Janet Marugg | FāVS News

The world doesn’t lack things to bruise this idealist’s heart, but I fear a fracture as the U.S. president orders an end to universal human rights. Especially now, with the U.S., under his administration, added to a global civil rights watchlist this month.

I mourn the Trump administration’s abrupt exit by executive order from the United Nations Human Rights Council. Is my “human harm” monitor more sensitive to human rights abuses as a secular humanist? I don’t think so.

I can’t tell the difference between the secular idea that humans have a right to live in peaceful sovereignty and the religiously-generated idea that humans have a right to live in peaceful sovereignty.

Human rights create conditions for humans to survive and flourish. Who is against this? Surely not a religious community claiming to care for people.

There is nothing in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights to ethically oppose. The president may be against humanity, but I hope the religious community still supports the importance of human rights.

Has your religious organization/church/congregation addressed the Trump administration in protest to these historically significant precursory signs of crimes against humanity?

It is anti-Christian-Buddhist-Hindu-Jewish — every faith I can think of — to be anti-human rights. Because of this, I urge all of us to send our concerns about President Trump’s executive order to eliminate human right security to U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi, as well as to federal elected officials in Congress.

It’s a religious right (and a moral thing to do) to ensure human rights.

Live your faith with action to safeguard human rights.

The views expressed in this opinion column are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of FāVS News. FāVS News values diverse perspectives and thoughtful analysis on matters of faith and spirituality.