UN rights council gets cold shoulder from Ottawa

[Valmy]

No but it DOES make those things easier to work towards. If you are too scared of warlords coming to your house to rape your children after cutting your arms off because you are vaguely different from the people doing the pillaging, you might not be so motivated to job hunt, buy nice things.

Yes but you can have human rights without those things.  There are countries in the word that have respect for human rights that have grinding poverty.  By this entitlement definition they, in fact, do not have respect for human rights because they have no eliminated poverty and educated everybody and that simply is not so.

Those are great goals but they are not human rights.

[saskganesh]

the idea behind these new "rights" is to make support for "political rights" meaningful. in other words, liberty is great, but if you are hungry, cold, stupid and diseased in an otherwise free society, liberty isn't that useful.

  They are just that: human rights not 'the secret of human happiness and prosperity'.

I'll opt with door B. Human rights, All of them, are indeed the secret of human happiness and prosperity.

[saskganesh]

No but it DOES make those things easier to work towards. If you are too scared of warlords coming to your house to rape your children after cutting your arms off because you are vaguely different from the people doing the pillaging, you might not be so motivated to job hunt, buy nice things.

Yes but you can have human rights without those things.  There are countries in the word that have respect for human rights that have grinding poverty.  By this entitlement definition they, in fact, do not have respect for human rights because they have no eliminated poverty and educated everybody and that simply is not so.

Those are great goals but they are not human rights.

those societies have rights, but I'd argue those rights are basically meaningless.

it's stupid to have choices when you can't make them. it's like the old soviet constitution

[garbon]

I'll opt with door B. Human rights, All of them, are indeed the secret of human happiness and prosperity.

Many people have all of those "rights" and they aren't necessarily happy. Also I think you could make an easy case that a stupid person could be happy (and likely similar cases for the other afflictions you noted).

[Valmy]

I'll opt with door B. Human rights, All of them, are indeed the secret of human happiness and prosperity.

I always thought they were the rights and freedoms that all people were entitled to have as part of their human dignity.  It never occured to me that, in fact, they are whatever makes people happy and prosperous.

[Malthus]

the idea behind these new "rights" is to make support for "political rights" meaningful. in other words, liberty is great, but if you are hungry, cold, stupid and diseased in an otherwise free society, liberty isn't that useful.

  They are just that: human rights not 'the secret of human happiness and prosperity'.

I'll opt with door B. Human rights, All of them, are indeed the secret of human happiness and prosperity.

The problem is that making the goal sufficiently utopian puts it out of reach of most states.

It is reasonably easy for a poor government to avoid killing dissidents - they merely have to stop doing it. Much more difficult for them to create the sort of social ritches that can support the modern welfare state. The two are not concerns of the same kind.

[garbon]

The problem is that making the goal sufficiently utopian puts it out of reach of most states.

Although, perhaps that is the point.  Keep states from resting on their laurels.

[Malthus]

The problem is that making the goal sufficiently utopian puts it out of reach of most states.

Although, perhaps that is the point.  Keep states from resting on their laurels.

I suspect most states view it in the opposite light, which would tend to explain why this notion of "rights" is popular in places like Egypt and Iran.

It makes "rights" into a sort of gigantic tu quoque argument aimed against the West. Iran may be a "human rights abuser", but then, so is Canada. 

[Valmy]

I suspect most states view it in the opposite light, which would tend to explain why this notion of "rights" is popular in places like Egypt and Iran.

It makes "rights" into a sort of gigantic tu quoque argument aimed against the West. Iran may be a "human rights abuser", but then, so is Canada. 

Bingo.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

I'll opt with door B. Human rights, All of them, are indeed the secret of human happiness and prosperity.

I always thought they were the rights and freedoms that all people were entitled to have as part of their human dignity.  It never occured to me that, in fact, they are whatever makes people happy and prosperous.

You are mixing up cause and effect.

These rights to basic dignity (regardless of social status) are a big part of the possibility of prosperity & happiness. They are not prosperity and happiness. They open the door so that it becomes a possibilty. Many people who have far more rights (aristocrats/moneyed types in our time) than others often still FAIL at happiness & prosperity. You have to make those things for yourself. The kind of rights I'm talking about are the ones that enable you to feel you can try to succeed. You still may fail. shit happens.

But if you have no choices. Freedom is a moot point.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

I suspect most states view it in the opposite light, which would tend to explain why this notion of "rights" is popular in places like Egypt and Iran.

It makes "rights" into a sort of gigantic tu quoque argument aimed against the West. Iran may be a "human rights abuser", but then, so is Canada. 

Bingo.

It's a retarded strawman argument though and any country or person who doesn't get that it's just schoolyard are too/ am nots is not worthy of their freedoms.

[garbon]

I suspect most states view it in the opposite light, which would tend to explain why this notion of "rights" is popular in places like Egypt and Iran.

It makes "rights" into a sort of gigantic tu quoque argument aimed against the West. Iran may be a "human rights abuser", but then, so is Canada. 

Sure but then states like Canada and the US have a vested interest in not defining "rights" in a way that make them look bad as well.  Besides, the Egyptian-Iranian use sounds silly to me as I don't really see how they can be like "We don't really guarantee any rights to our citizens, but you're just as bad Canada as although there might be freedom and liberty in your country, you haven't eliminated poverty."

[BuddhaRhubarb]

I suspect most states view it in the opposite light, which would tend to explain why this notion of "rights" is popular in places like Egypt and Iran.

It makes "rights" into a sort of gigantic tu quoque argument aimed against the West. Iran may be a "human rights abuser", but then, so is Canada. 

Sure but then states like Canada and the US have a vested interest in not defining "rights" in a way that make them look bad as well.  Besides, the Egyptian-Iranian use sounds silly to me as I don't really see how they can be like "We don't really guarantee any rights to our citizens, but you're just as bad Canada as although there might be freedom and liberty in your country, you haven't eliminated poverty."

see they'd be laughed off Languish.

[Berkut]

the idea behind these new "rights" is to make support for "political rights" meaningful. in other words, liberty is great, but if you are hungry, cold, stupid and diseased in an otherwise free society, liberty isn't that useful.

  They are just that: human rights not 'the secret of human happiness and prosperity'.

I'll opt with door B. Human rights, All of them, are indeed the secret of human happiness and prosperity.

I would say they are a necessary but not sufficient condition.

[KRonn]

On the economic front, Canada rejected related recommendations from Russia and Ghana to launch a national poverty-elimination program. Canada said provinces and territories have jurisdiction in that area.

Sheesh... as if Canada doesn't have support and programs in place already. Now they're being told by nations like Russia, which is heading back to their bad old days, how to reduce poverty and treat their citizens. Good going by Canada to reject this mishmash of ideology and ideas.