Week 3 Response Paper: Religion in the Modern Human Rights Regime

The roots of human rights are beyond a modern, western invention. There is a surfeit of scholarly work that suggests the opposite; in this paper, I will use the Western Enlightenment idea of human rights described as “subjective rights,” claims, or freedom vested in a person (Witte 20-21). In their argument for the development of this concept of human rights in the Western enlightenment, some scholars have suggested that Asian values, historically, have placed greater emphasis on order and economic development, making the concept of human rights less relevant to Asian cultures compared to those of the West (Sen 9-10). However, one must note that even those religious traditions that do not seem compatible with a respect for universal human rights in fact demonstrate an appreciation of the rights and responsibilities of each individual. In Hinduism, the caste system, rather than being a hierarchical order of oppressive social classes, champions the idea of egalitarian complementarity, in which the unique contributions of each class to the interdependent community are noted through reciprocal relationships (Martin 270-273). Furthermore, the Confucian concept of strictly-defined relationships between members from different sectors of society reveals an emphasis on moral self-cultivation in order to establish trust and stronger relations within a community of people, who are once again seen to be social and interdependent (Twiss 284-286). Scholars such as Leo Strauss who argue that the discussion on human rights was established during the Enlightenment emphasize that the language of human rights cannot be found in any context outside modern western traditions (Witte 21). In their references to the interrelated, interdependent community, Asian religions, specifically Buddhism, transcend the Western understanding of human rights by providing a clear explanation for why everyone must be treated with compassion, and their rights should be respected—one’s treatment of others is part of the karma that determines the nature of one’s future lifecycles in the endless process of evolution (Thurman 108). Sen adds that the Hindu teachings demonstrate a keen understanding of personal liberty and toleration of others, at least in the privileges held by the upper classes (Sen 21-22). The fact that these non-western traditions approached the concept of human rights with a different viewpoint, or preached only select components of said ideals, does not alienate them from human rights talk, or prevent them from being the religious roots for these rights.