1.
Rights
–
Rights are of essential importance in such disciplines as law and ethics, especially theories of justice and deontology. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, rights structure the form of governments, the content of laws, there is considerable disagreement about what is meant precisely by the term rights. One way to get an idea of the understandings and senses of the term is to consider different ways it is used. Natural rights are rights which are natural in the sense of not artificial, not man-made, as in rights deriving from deontic logic, from human nature, or from the edicts of a god. They are universal, that is, they apply to all people and they exist necessarily, inhere in every individual, and cant be taken away. For example, it has argued that humans have a natural right to life. These are sometimes called moral rights or inalienable rights, legal rights, in contrast, are based on a societys customs, laws, statutes or actions by legislatures. An example of a right is the right to vote of citizens. Citizenship, itself, is considered as the basis for having legal rights. Legal rights are called civil rights or statutory rights and are culturally and politically relative since they depend on a specific societal context to have meaning. Some thinkers see rights in one sense while others accept that both senses have a measure of validity. There has been considerable debate about these senses throughout history. A claim right is a right which entails that another person has a duty to the right-holder. In logic, this idea can be expressed as, Person A has a claim that person B do something if, every claim-right entails that some other duty-bearer must do some duty for the claim to be satisfied. This duty can be to act or to refrain from acting, likewise, in jurisdictions where social welfare services are provided, citizens have legal claim rights to be provided with those services. A liberty right or privilege, in contrast, is simply a freedom or permission for the right-holder to do something and this can be expressed in logic as, Person A has a privilege to do something if and only if A has no duty not to do that something. Likewise, if a person has a right against someone else. For example, a person has a liberty right to walk down a sidewalk and can decide whether or not to do so
2.
Natural and legal rights
–
Natural and legal rights are two types of rights. Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a legal system. Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any culture or government. The concept of law is closely related to the concept of natural rights. Conversely, the concept of rights is used by others to challenge the legitimacy of all such establishments. Natural rights, in particular, are considered beyond the authority of any government or international body to dismiss, the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an important legal instrument enshrining one conception of natural rights into international soft law. Natural rights were traditionally viewed as exclusively negative rights, whereas human rights also comprise positive rights, even on a natural rights conception of human rights, the two terms may not be synonymous. The proposition that animals have natural rights is one that gained the interest of philosophers and legal scholars in the 20th century, the existence of natural rights has been asserted by different individuals on different premises, such as a priori philosophical reasoning or religious principles. For example, Immanuel Kant claimed to derive natural rights through reason alone, the United States Declaration of Independence, meanwhile, is based upon the self-evident truth that all men are. Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, likewise, different philosophers and statesmen have designed different lists of what they believe to be natural rights, almost all include the right to life and liberty as the two highest priorities. H. L. A. Hart argued that if there are any rights at all, there must be the right to liberty, for all the others would depend upon this. T. H. Green argued that “if there are things as rights at all, then, there must be a right to life and liberty, or, to put it more properly to free life. ”John Locke emphasized life. However, despite Lockes influential defense of the right of revolution, leaders are seen as representative of God on earth, but they deserve allegiance only as long as they have farr, a kind of divine blessing that they must earn by moral behavior. The Stoics held that no one was a slave by nature, of fundamental importance to the development of the idea of natural rights was the emergence of the idea of natural human equality. Carlyle notes, There is no change in theory so startling in its completeness as the change from the theory of Aristotle to the later philosophical view represented by Cicero. We think that this cannot be better exemplified than with regard to the theory of the equality of human nature, charles H. Cicero argues in De Legibus that we are born for Justice, and that right is based, not upon opinions, but upon Nature. Centuries later, the Stoic doctrine that the part cannot be delivered into bondage re-emerged in the Reformation doctrine of liberty of conscience. Martin Luther wrote, Furthermore, every man is responsible for his own faith, preservation of the natural rights to life, liberty, and property was claimed as justification for the rebellion of the American colonies
3.
Negative and positive rights
–
Negative and positive rights are rights that respectively oblige either action or inaction. These obligations may be of either a legal or moral character, the notion of positive and negative rights may also be applied to liberty rights. To take an example involving two parties in a court of law, Adrian has a right to x against Clay if. In contrast, Adrian has a right to x against Clay if. In the three generations account of human rights, negative rights are associated with the first generation of rights, while positive rights are associated with the second. Some philosophers disagree that the negative-positive rights distinction is useful or valid, as such, negative rights exist unless someone acts to negate them. A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action of another person or group, in other words, for a positive right to be exercised, someone elses actions must be added to the equation. In theory, a negative right forbids others from acting against the right holder, in the framework of the Kantian categorical imperative, negative rights can be associated with perfect duties while positive rights can be connected to imperfect duties. Belief in a distinction between positive and negative rights is usually maintained, or emphasized, by libertarians, who believe that rights do not exist until they are created by contract. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights lists both positive and negative rights, the constitutions of most liberal democracies guarantee negative rights, but not all include positive rights. Rights are often spoken of as inalienable and sometimes even absolute, thus, even if the right not to be killed is inalienable, the corresponding obligation on others to refrain from killing is generally understood to have at least one exception, self-defense. Likewise a shopkeeper or other passerby may also meet this burden of proof when tackling the thief, but if any of those individuals pulled a gun and shot the thief for stealing, most modern societies would not accept that the burden of proof had been met. Most modern societies insist that other, very serious ethical questions need come into play before stealing could justify killing, but as we see with the police officer, exercising a duty may violate negative obligations. For this reason, in ethics positive obligations are almost never considered prima facie, the greatest negative obligation may have just one exception—one higher obligation of self-defense—but even the greatest positive obligations generally require more complex ethical analysis. For example, one could easily justify failing to help, not just one and this consideration has led ethicists to agree in a general way that positive obligations are usually junior to negative obligations because they are not reliably prima facie. Some critics of positive rights implicitly suggest that positive obligations are not reliably prima facie they must always be agreed to through contract. He says that the question between what one has a right to do and who if anybody enforces it are separate issues, therefore, he says the distinction between negative and positive is quite robust. Libertarians hold that positive rights, which would include a right to be protected, however, those who hold this view do not mean that police, for example, are not obligated to protect the rights of citizens
4.
Civil and political rights
–
Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals freedom from infringement by governments, social organizations, and private individuals. They ensure ones ability to participate in the civil and political life of the society, Civil and political rights form the original and main part of international human rights. They comprise the first portion of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the phrase civil rights is a translation of Latin ius civis. Roman citizens could be either free or servile, but they all had rights in law. After the Edict of Milan in 313, these included the freedom of religion. Roman legal doctrine was lost during the Middle Ages, but claims of rights could still be made based on religious doctrine. According to the leaders of Ketts Rebellion, all men may be made free. In the 17th century, English common law judge Sir Edward Coke revived the idea of rights based on citizenship by arguing that Englishmen had historically enjoyed such rights, the Parliament of England adopted the English Bill of Rights in 1689. The Virginia Declaration of Rights, by George Mason and James Madison, was adopted in 1776, the Virginia declaration is the direct ancestor and model for the U. S. Bill of Rights. The removal by legislation of a civil right constitutes a civil disability, in early 19th century Britain, the phrase civil rights most commonly referred to the issue of such legal discrimination against Catholics. In the House of Commons support for civil rights was divided, the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 restored their civil rights. In the 1860s, Americans adapted this usage to newly freed blacks, congress enacted civil rights acts in 1866,1871,1875,1957,1960,1964,1968, and 1991. Marshall notes that civil rights were among the first to be recognized and codified, followed later by political rights, in many countries, they are constitutional rights and are included in a bill of rights or similar document. They are also defined in human rights instruments, such as the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Civil and political rights need not be codified to be protected, although most democracies worldwide do have formal written guarantees of civil, Civil rights are considered to be natural rights. Thomas Jefferson wrote in his A Summary View of the Rights of British America that a free people their rights as derived from the laws of nature, the question of to whom civil and political rights apply is a subject of controversy. According to political scientist Salvador Santino F. Regilme Jr. Custom also plays a role, the United States Declaration of Independence states that people have unalienable rights including Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. It is considered by some that the purpose of government is the protection of life. Ideas of self-ownership and cognitive liberty affirm rights to choose the food one eats, the one takes
5.
Animal rights
–
They maintain that animals should no longer be viewed as property or used as food, clothing, research subjects, entertainment, or beasts of burden. Advocates approach the issue from a variety of perspectives, the abolitionist view is that animals have moral rights, which the pursuit of incremental reform may undermine by encouraging human beings to feel comfortable with using them. Gary Franciones abolitionist position promotes ethical veganism and he argues that animal rights groups that pursue welfare concerns, such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, risk making the public feel comfortable about its use of animals. He calls such groups the new welfarists, PETA argues that Franciones criticism does little to help alleviate the suffering of individual animals and also trivializes the efforts of workers in the field who handle cruelty cases. It also creates divisiveness within the animal liberation movement instead of focusing on shared goals, sentiocentrism is the theory that sentient individuals are the subject of moral concern and therefore are deserving of rights. Protectionists seek incremental reform in how animals are treated, with a view to ending animal use entirely and this position is represented by the philosopher Peter Singer. Multiple cultural traditions around the world—such as Animism, Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, the animals most often considered in arguments for personhood are bonobos and chimpanzees. S. Congress with the enactment of the Animal Enterprise Protection Act, Aristotle argued that animals lacked reason, and placed humans at the top of the natural world, yet the respect for animals in ancient Greece was very high. Some animals were considered divine e. g. dolphins, the 21st-century debates about animals can be traced back to the ancient world, and the idea of a divine hierarchy. Dominion need not entail property rights, but it has been interpreted, by some, contemporary philosopher Bernard Rollin writes that dominion does not entail or allow abuse any more than does dominion a parent enjoys over a child. Rollin further states that the Biblical Sabbath requirement promulgated in the Ten Commandments required that animals be granted a day of rest along with humans, correlatively, the Bible forbids plowing with an ox and an ass together. According to the tradition, this prohibition stems from the hardship that an ass would suffer by being compelled to keep up with an ox. Similarly, one finds the prohibition against muzzling an ox when it treads out the grain and these ancient regulations, virtually forgotten, bespeak of an eloquent awareness of the status of animals as ends in themselves, a point also corroborated by Norm Phelps. The philosopher and mathematician, Pythagoras, urged respect for animals, believing that human and nonhuman souls were reincarnated from human to animal, and vice versa. Against this, Aristotle, student to the philosopher Plato, argued that animals had no interests of their own. Theophrastus, one of Aristotles pupils, argued that also had reasoning. Plutarch in his Life of Cato the Elder comments that while law and justice are strictly to men only, beneficence. This is intended as a correction and advance over the merely utilitarian treatment of animals, according to Richard D. Ryder, the first known animal protection legislation in Europe was passed in Ireland in 1635
6.
Children's rights
–
Childrens rights are the human rights of children with particular attention to the rights of special protection and care afforded to minors. The Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 defines a child as any person who has not reached the age of eighteen years. Other definitions include the rights to care and nurturing, a child is any human being below the age of eighteen years, unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier. The field of childrens rights spans the fields of law, politics, religion, is a mass of human rights law, both treaty and soft law, both general and child-specific, which recognises the distinct status and particular requirements of children. As minors by law children do not have autonomy or the right to decisions on their own for themselves in any known jurisdiction of the world. Instead their adult caregivers, including parents, social workers, teachers, youth workers, some believe that this state of affairs gives children insufficient control over their own lives and causes them to be vulnerable. Louis Althusser has gone so far as to describe this legal machinery, as it applies to children, on this view, children are to be regarded as a minority group towards whom society needs to reconsider the way it behaves. Researchers have identified children as needing to be recognized as participants in society whose rights, sir William Blackstone recognized three parental duties to the child, maintenance, protection, and education. In modern language, the child has a right to receive these from the parent, consensus on defining childrens rights has become clearer in the last fifty years. A1973 publication by Hillary Clinton stated that childrens rights were a slogan in need of a definition, children’s rights law is defined as the point where the law intersects with a childs life. Children have two types of rights under international human rights law. General rights operative in childhood include the right to security of the person, to freedom from inhuman, cruel, or degrading treatment, Childrens rights are defined in numerous ways, including a wide spectrum of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. These have been labeled as the right of empowerment and as the right to protection, United Nations educational guides for children classify the rights outlined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child as the 3 Ps, Provision, Protection, and Participation. They may be elaborated as follows, Provision, Children have the right to a standard of living, health care, education and services. These include a diet, a warm bed to sleep in. Protection, Children have the right to protection from abuse, neglect and this includes the right to safe places for children to play, constructive child rearing behavior, and acknowledgment of the evolving capacities of children. Participation, Children have the right to participate in communities and have programs and this includes childrens involvement in libraries and community programs, youth voice activities, and involving children as decision-makers. Human Rights Watch, an advocacy organization, includes child labor, juvenile justice, orphans and abandoned children, refugees, street children
7.
Consumer protection
–
The laws are designed to prevent the businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors. They may also provide protection for those most vulnerable in society. Consumer protection laws are a form of government regulation that aim to protect the rights of consumers, for example, a government may require businesses to disclose detailed information about products—particularly in areas where safety or public health is an issue, such as food. A consumer is defined as someone who acquires goods or services for use or ownership rather than for resale or use in production. Consumer protection can also be asserted via non-government organizations and individuals as consumer activism, Consumer protection law or consumer law is considered an area of law that regulates private law relationships between individual consumers and the businesses that sell those goods and services. Its a way of preventing fraud and scams from service and sales contracts, bill collector regulation, pricing, utility turnoffs, consolidation, the following lists consumer legislation at the nation-state level. In the EU member states Germany and the United Kingdom there is also the applicability of law at the EU level to be considered, in Australia, the corresponding agency is the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission or the individual State Consumer Affairs agencies. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has responsibility for consumer protection regulation of financial services, however, in practice it does so through privately run EDR schemes such as the Financial Ombudsman Service. Germany as a state of the European Union is bound by the consumer protection directives of the European Union. A minister of the cabinet is responsible for consumer rights. In the current cabinet of Angela Merkel, this is Heiko Maas.84,71 BVerwGE 183), in India The Consumer protection act,1986 is governing consumer protection. Appeal could be filed to the State Consumer Disputes Redress Commissions, in recent years, many effective judgment have been passed by some state and National Consumer Forums. The Sale of Goods Act of 1930 act provides some safeguards to buyers of goods if goods purchased do not fulfill the express or implied conditions, the Civil Code in Taiwan contains five books, General Principles, Obligations, Rights over Things, Family, and Succession. The second book of the Code, the Book of Obligations, the Consumer Protection Commission of Executive Yuan serves as an ombudsman supervising, coordinating, reporting any unsafe products/services and periodically reviewing the legislation. Specifics of the division of labour between the EU and the UK are detailed here, domestic laws originated within the ambit of contract and tort but, with the influence of EU law, it is emerging as an independent area of law. In many circumstances, where law is in question, the matter judicially treated as tort, contract. Consumer Protection issues are dealt with when complaints are made to the Director-General of Fair Trade, the Office of Fair Trading will then investigate, impose an injunction or take the matter to litigation. However, consumers cannot directly complain to the OFT, complaints need to be made to the Citizens Advice Consumer Service who will provide legal advice to complainants, or re-direct the individual complaint to Trading Standards for investigation
8.
Creditor's rights
–
Creditors rights are the procedural provisions designed to protect the ability of creditors—persons who are owed money—to collect the money that they are owed. The rights of a particular creditor usually depend in part on the reason for which the debt is owed, creditors rights deal not only with the rights of creditors against the debtor, but also with the rights of creditors against one another. Creditors may also be classed according to whether they are in possession of the collateral, a creditor may generally ask a court to set aside a fraudulent conveyance designed to move the debtors property or funds out of their reach. Some lawyers have a practice area focused on the collection of such debts. Such attorneys are frequently referred to as attorneys or collection lawyers
9.
Fetal rights
–
Fetal rights are moral rights or legal rights of human fetuses under natural and civil law. The term fetal rights came into wide usage after the landmark case Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion in the United States in 1973, the concept of fetal rights has evolved to include the issues of maternal drug and alcohol abuse. The only international treaty specifically tackling the fetal rights is the American Convention on Human Rights which envisages the fetal right to life, many legal experts recognize an increasing need to settle the legal status of the fetus. In antiquity, a fetus was sometimes protected by restrictions on abortion, some versions of the Hippocratic Oath indirectly protected fetus by prohibiting abortifacients. Until approximately the mid-19th century, philosophical views on the fetus were influenced in part by Aristotelian concept of delayed hominization, according to it, human fetuses only gradually acquire their souls, and in the early stages of pregnancy the fetus is not fully human. Relying on examinations of miscarried fetuses, Aristotle believed that male fetuses acquire their basic form at around day 40, for Pythagoreans, however, fetal life was co-equal in moral worth with adult human life from the moment of conception, similar views were held by Stoics. Ancient Athenian law did not recognise fetal right to life before the ritual acknowledgement of the child, the law, however, allowed to postpone the execution of sentenced pregnant women until a baby was delivered. Several Hindu texts on ethics and righteousness, such as Dharmaśāstra, give fetus a right to life from conception, the property law of Roman Empire granted fetus inheritance rights. As long as the fetus was conceived before the death and then born alive. Even though under the Roman law the fetus was not a legal subject, Roman jurist Ulpian noted, that in the Law of the Twelve Tables he who was in the womb is admitted to the legitimate succession, if he has been born. The inheritance rights of the fetus were means of fulfilling the testators will, the interests of the fetus could be protected by a custodian, usually a male relative, but in some cases a woman herself could be appointed the custodian. The Digest granted the fetus consanguinity rights, vesting the protection of interests in the praetor. The Digest also prohibited the execution of pregnant women until delivery, the Roman law also envisaged that if a slave mother had been free for any period between the time of the conception and childbirth, the child would be regarded as born free. Although the mother might have become slave again before the childbirth, at the same time, Greek and Roman sources do not mention issues of alcohol consumption by pregnant women. On that basis it is believed that Greeks and Romans were not aware of the fetal alcohol syndrome, the Synod of Neo-Caesarea decided that the baptism of a pregnant woman in any stage of gestation did not include the fetus. In the Middle Ages, fetal rights were associated with the concept of ensoulment. In some cases the fetus could also inherit or be in the order of succession, in the Byzantine Empire, fetus was regarded as a natural person and could inherit alongside blood descendents and slaves. Byzantine Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos allowed soldiers to transfer their pronoiai to their unborn children, the unborn royals were increasingly granted the right to succession
10.
Human rights
–
Human rights are moral principles or norms, which describe certain standards of human behaviour, and are regularly protected as legal rights in municipal and international law. They are applicable everywhere and at time in the sense of being universal. They require empathy and the rule of law and impose an obligation on persons to respect the rights of others. They should not be taken away except as a result of due process based on circumstances, for example, human rights may include freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture. The doctrine of human rights has been influential within international law. Actions by states and non-governmental organizations form a basis of public policy worldwide, the idea of human rights suggests that if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights. The strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature, ancient peoples did not have the same modern-day conception of universal human rights. Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the family is the foundation of freedom. All human beings are free and equal in dignity and rights. According to Jack Donnelly, in the ancient world, traditional societies typically have had elaborate systems of duties, conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights. These institutions and practices are alternative to, rather than different formulations of, one theory is that human rights were developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics. The most commonly held view is that the concept of human rights evolved in the West, for example, McIntyre argues there is no word for right in any language before 1400. One of the oldest records of rights is the statute of Kalisz, giving privileges to the Jewish minority in the Kingdom of Poland such as protection from discrimination. Samuel Moyn suggests that the concept of rights is intertwined with the modern sense of citizenship. The earliest conceptualization of human rights is credited to ideas about natural rights emanating from natural law, in particular, the issue of universal rights was introduced by the examination of extending rights to indigenous peoples by Spanish clerics, such as Francisco de Vitoria and Bartolomé de Las Casas. In Britain in 1689, the English Bill of Rights and the Scottish Claim of Right each made illegal a range of oppressive governmental actions, additionally, the Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 encoded into law a number of fundamental civil rights and civil freedoms. These were followed by developments in philosophy of human rights by philosophers such as Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill, hegel during the 18th and 19th centuries. Although the term had been used by at least one author as early as 1742, in the 19th century, human rights became a central concern over the issue of slavery
11.
Divine right of kings
–
The divine right of kings, divine right, or Gods mandate is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, the king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm. It implies that only God can judge an unjust king and that any attempt to depose, dethrone or restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and it is only an implication and the Bible states Iron sharpens iron, referring to accountability to each other. It also implies the higher accountability of Monarchs to implement policies in line with Christs commandment to Love one another and it is often expressed in the phrase by the Grace of God, attached to the titles of a reigning monarch. In the pagan world, kings were often seen as ruling with the backing of heavenly powers or perhaps even being divine beings themselves. However, the Christian notion of a right of kings could be traced to the biblical story found in 1 Samuel. And the anointing is to such an effect that the monarch became inviolable, adomnan of Iona is one of the earliest Christian proponents of this concept of kings ruling with divine right. He wrote of the Irish King Diarmait mac Cerbaills assassination and claimed that divine punishment fell on his assassin for the act of violating the monarch, the same angel then visited Columba on three successive nights, and then finally Columba agreed and Aedan came to receive ordination. Adomnans writings most likely influenced other Irish writers, who in turn influenced continental ideas as well, pepin the Shorts coronation may have also come from the same influence. The Carolingian dynasty and the Holy Roman Emperors also influenced all subsequent western ideas of kingship, the immediate author of the theory was Jean Bodin, who based it on the interpretation of Roman law. With the rise of nation-states and the Protestant Reformation, the theory of divine right justified the kings authority in both political and spiritual matters. The theory came to the fore in England under the reign of James I of England, louis XIV of France strongly promoted the theory as well. The Scots textbooks of the right of kings were written in 1597–98 by James VI of Scotland before his accession to the English throne. James I based his theories in part on his understanding of the Bible, the state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only Gods lieutenants upon earth and sit upon Gods throne, but even by God himself they are called gods. There be three principal that illustrate the state of monarchy, one out of the word of God. In the Scriptures kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power, Kings are also compared to fathers of families, for a king is truly parens patriae, the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man, jamess reference to Gods lieutenants is apparently a reference to the controversial text in Romans 13, where Paul refers to Gods ministers. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God, the powers that be are ordained of God
12.
Men's rights movement
–
The mens rights movement is a part of the larger mens movement. It branched off from the liberation movement in the early 1970s. The mens rights movement is made up of a variety of groups and individuals who focus on social issues and government services. Some scholars consider the mens rights movement or parts of the movement to be a backlash to feminism, claims and activities associated with the mens rights movement have been criticized by some scholars, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and commentators. Some sectors of the movement have been described as misogynistic, others argue that perceived disadvantage is often due to loss of entitlement and privilege. The term mens rights was used at least as early as February 1856 when it appeared in Putnams Magazine, three loosely connected mens rights organizations formed in Austria in the interwar period. The League for Mens Rights was founded in 1926 with the goal of combatting all excesses of womens emancipation, in 1927, the Justitia League for Family Law Reform and the Aequitas Worlds League for the Rights of Men split from the League of Mens Rights. The three mens rights groups opposed womens entry into the market and what they saw as the corrosive influence of the womens movement on social and legal institutions. The organizations ceased to exist before 1939, the modern mens rights movement emerged from the mens liberation movement, which appeared in the first half of the 1970s when some scholars began to study feminist ideas and politics. The mens liberation movement acknowledged mens institutional power while critically examining the costs of traditional masculinity, in the late 1970s, the mens liberation movement split into two separate strands with opposing views, the pro-feminist mens movement and the anti-feminist mens rights movement. Mens rights activists have rejected feminist principles and focused on areas in which they believe men are disadvantaged, oppressed, in the 1980s and 90s, mens rights activists opposed societal changes sought by feminists and defended the traditional gender order in the family, schools and the workplace. Some mens rights activists see men as a group and believe that society. One of the first major mens rights organizations was the Coalition of American Divorce Reform Elements, founded by Richard Doyle in 1971, from which the Mens Rights Association spun off in 1973. Free Men Inc. was founded in 1977 in Columbia, Maryland, spawning several chapters over the following years, Mens Rights, Inc. was also formed in 1977. In the United Kingdom, a rights group calling itself the UK Mens Movement began to organize in the early 1990s. The Save Indian Family Foundation was founded in 2005, and in 2010 claimed to have over 30,000 members, Mens rights groups have formed in some European countries during periods of shifts toward conservatism and policies supporting traditional family and gender relations. In the United States, the mens rights movement has ties to neoconservatism. Mens rights activists have received lobbying support from organizations and their arguments have been covered extensively in neoconservative media
13.
Patients' rights
–
A patients bill of rights is a list of guarantees for those receiving medical care. It may take the form of a law or a non-binding declaration, typically a patients bill of rights guarantees patients information, fair treatment, and autonomy over medical decisions, among other rights. In the United States there have been a number of attempts to enshrine a patients bill of rights in law, a patients bill of rights was considered by the United States Congress in 2001. Its proposed title was the Bipartisan Patient Protection Act and it was known officially as Senate Bill S.1052 and informally as the McCain-Edwards-Kennedy Patients Bill of Rights. The bill was an attempt at providing comprehensive protections to all Americans covered by insurance plans. The House of Representatives and Senate passed differing versions of the proposed law, the Senates proposal would have conferred a broad array of rights on patients. The industry, however, goes to lengths to keep its involvement in these campaigns hidden from public view. Indeed, in a successful 1998 effort to kill the Patient Bill of Rights then, like most front groups, the Health Benefits Coalition was set up and run out of one of Washington’s biggest P. R. firms. The P. R. firm provided all the work for the Coalition. Industry allies in Congress made sure the Patients’ Bill of Rights would not become law, some have cited differences between positive rights and personal freedoms. American Iatrogenic Association Promoting accountability for medical professionals and institutions Summary of the McCain-Edwards-Kennedy Patients Bill of Rights S.10522001
14.
Plant rights
–
Plant rights are rights to which plants may be entitled. Such issues are raised in connection with discussions about human rights, animal rights, biocentrism. On the question of animal rights can be extended to plants, philosopher Tom Regan argues that animals acquire rights due to being aware. He argues that this does not apply to plants, and that even if plants did have rights, according to philosopher Michael Marder, the idea that plants should have rights derives from plant subjectivity, which is distinct from human personhood. Philosopher Paul Taylor holds that all life has inherent worth and argues for respect for plants, whilst not appealing directly to rights, Matthew Hall has argued that plants should be included within the realm of human moral consideration. In the study of plant physiology, plants are understood to have mechanisms by which they recognize environmental changes and this definition of plant perception differs from the notion that plants are capable of feeling emotions, an idea also called plant perception. A ship has a personality, a fiction found useful for maritime purposes. The voice of the inanimate object, therefore. Samuel Butlers Erewhon contains a chapter, The Views of an Erewhonian Philosopher Concerning the Rights of Vegetables, the single-issue Party for Plants entered candidates in the 2010 parliamentary election in the Netherlands. Such concerns have been criticized as evidence that modern culture is causing us to lose the ability to think critically and distinguish serious from frivolous ethical concerns. In 2012, a river in New Zealand, including the plants, when challenged by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to become vegetarian, Timothy McVeigh argued that plants are alive too, they react to stimuli, have circulation systems, etc
15.
Student rights in higher education
–
There is very little scholarship about student rights throughout the world. In general most countries have some kind of student rights enshrined in their laws, some countries, like Romania, in the European Union, have comprehensive student bills of rights, which outline both rights and how they are to be proceduralized. Canada, like the United States, has a number of laws and court precedents which regulate higher education and this article is concerned with students in public institutions, although those in private schools can claim rights under the common law and provincial education Acts. Canada does not yet have a national student Bill of Rights or comparable document, if and when one is put in place in Canada it is likely that this document will be called a Charter of Student Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is equivalent to the National Bill of Rights in the United States, the Canadian national student union or government is the Canadian Federation of Students and it has not put forth any such bill. In the US, students have many rights accorded by bills or laws and these have been proceduralized by the courts to varying degrees. The US does not, however, have a national Student Bill of Rights and students rely on institutions to provide this information. While some colleges are posting their own student bills, there is no requirement that they do so. Right to protection from arbitrary or capricious decision making Decision making should not be arbitrary or capricious / random and, thus, while this case concerned a private school, Healy v. Larsson found that what applied to private intuitions applied also to public. Right to have institutions follow their own rules Institutions are required, contractually, institutional documents may also be considered binding implied-n-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College ruled that documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer. Right to adherence to bulletins and circulars Students are protected from deviation from information advertised in bulletins or circulars, Right to adherence to regulations Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in regulations. Right to adherence to course catalogues Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in course catalogues, Right to adherence to student codes Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in student codes. Right to adherence to handbooks Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in handbooks, Right to a continuous contract Mississippi Medical Center v. Degree requirement changes are unacceptable. Bruner v. Petersen found also that contractual protections do not apply in the event that a student, the student may be required to meet additional requirements which support their success. This may also help avoid issues of discrimination, Right to notice of degree requirement changes Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences Chicago Med. School determined that students have the right to notice of degree requirement changes, Right to fulfillment of verbal promises Verbal contracts are also binding. The North Carolina Court of Appeals in Long v. University of North Carolina at Wilmington found, however, dezick v. Umpqua Community College found a student was compensated because classes offered orally by the dean were not provided
16.
Women's rights
–
In some countries, these rights are institutionalized or supported by law, local custom, and behavior, whereas in others they are ignored and suppressed. They differ from broader notions of rights through claims of an inherent historical and traditional bias against the exercise of rights by women and girls, in favor of men. Although males seem to have dominated in many cultures, there are some exceptions, for example, in the Nigerian Aka culture women may hunt, even on their own, and often control distribution of resources. Ancient Egypt had female rulers, such as Cleopatra, Women throughout historical and ancient China were considered inferior and had subordinate legal status based on the Confucian law. In Imperial China, the Three Obediences promoted daughters to obey their fathers, wives to obey their husbands, Women could not inherit businesses or wealth and men had to adopt a son for such financial purposes. Late imperial law also featured seven different types of divorces, the status of women in China was also low largely due to the custom of foot binding. About 45% of Chinese women had bound feet in the 19th century, for the upper classes, it was almost 100%. In 1912, the Chinese government ordered the cessation of foot-binding, foot-binding involved alteration of the bone structure so that the feet were only about 4 inches long. The bound feet caused difficulty of movement, thus limiting the activities of women. Due to the custom that men and women should not be near each other. This resulted in a tremendous need for doctors of Western Medicine in China. Thus, female medical missionary Dr. Mary H. Fulton was sent by the Foreign Missions Board of the Presbyterian Church to found the first medical college for women in China. Known as the Hackett Medical College for Women, this College was located in Guangzhou, China, the College was aimed at the spreading of Christianity and modern medicine and the elevation of Chinese womens social status. During the Republic of China and earlier Chinese governments, women were legally bought and these women were known as Mui Tsai. The lives of Mui Tsai were recorded by American feminist Agnes Smedley in her book Portraits of Chinese Women in Revolution. However, in 1949 the Republic of China had been overthrown by communist guerillas led by Mao Zedong, in May 1950 the Peoples Republic of China enacted the New Marriage Law to tackle the sale of women into slavery. This outlawed marriage by proxy and made legal so long as both partners consent. The New Marriage Law raised the age of marriage to 20 for men and 18 for women
17.
Youth rights
–
Youth rights are rights that young people have due to having reached a specific age or sufficient maturity. Youth rights have increased over the last century in many countries, the youth rights movement seeks to further increase youth rights, with some advocating intergenerational equity. Youth rights are one aspect of how youth are treated in society, other aspects include how adults see and treat youth, and how open society is to youth participation. Several of these made by society include the assumption that young people are incapable of making crucial decisions. There are specific sets of issues addressing the rights of youth in schools, including zero tolerance, gulag schools, In loco parentis, homeschooling, unschooling, and alternative schools are popular youth rights issues. A long-standing effort within the rights movements has focused on civic engagement. There have been a number of campaigns to increase youth voting rights by lowering the voting age. There are also efforts to get young people elected to prominent positions in local communities, including as members of city councils, for example, in the 2011 Raleigh mayoral election 17-year-old Seth Keel launched a campaign for Mayor despite the age requirement of 21. First emerging as a movement in the 1930s, youth rights have long been concerned with civil rights. Tracing its roots to youth activists during the Great Depression, youth rights has influenced the civil movement, opposition to the Vietnam War. Since the advent of the Internet youth rights is gaining predominance again, generally, the importance of judging each individual by observable relevant behaviors and not by birth date is stressed by advocates of these views. Childrens rights cover all the rights belong to children, when they grow up they are granted new rights. After youth reach these limits they are free to vote, have intercourse, buy or consume alcohol beverages or to drive cars. They point out distinctions between 1970s youth liberation literature and child rights literature from groups such as the Childrens Defense Fund, International Youth Rights is a student-run youth rights organization in China, with regional chapters across the country and abroad. Its aim is to make voices of youth be heard across the world, the European Youth Forum is the platform of the National Youth Council and International Non-Governamental Youth Organisations in Europe. It strives for youth rights in International Institutions such as the European Union, the Council of Europe, the European Youth Forum works in the fields of youth policy and youth work development. It focuses its work on European youth policy matters, whilst through engagement on the level it is enhancing the capacities of its members. The principles of equality and sustainable development are mainstreamed in the work of the European Youth Forum, other International youth rights organizations include Article 12 in Scotland and K. R. A. T. Z. A. in Germany
18.
Disability rights movement
–
The disability rights movement is a global movement to secure equal opportunities and equal rights for all people with disabilities. Disability activists are working to break institutional, physical, and societal barriers that prevent people with disabilities from living their lives like other citizens, the social model of disability suggests disability is caused by the way society is organised, rather than by a person’s disability. This model suggests barriers in society are created by ableism, when barriers are removed, people with disabilities can be independent and equal in society. There are three types of barriers, Attitudinal barriers, are created by people who see only disability when associating with people with disabilities in some way. These attitudinal barriers can be witnessed through bullying, discrimination, and these barriers include low expectations of people with disabilities. These barriers contribute to all other barriers, attitudes towards people with disabilities in low and middle-income countries can be even more extreme. Environmental barriers, inaccessible environments, natural or built, create disability by creating barriers to inclusion, institutional barriers, include many laws, policies, practices, or strategies that discriminate against people with disabilities. Restrictive laws exist in countries, particularly affecting people with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities. Other barriers include, internalised barriers, inadequate data and statistics, access to public areas such as city streets, public buildings, and restrooms are some of the more visible changes brought about in recent decades to remove physical barriers. People with color vision deficiency regularly deal with discrimination due to their inability to distinguish certain colors. It has been adopted rapidly by numerous businesses to boost sales, unlike many of the leaders in the physical disability rights community, self-advocacy has been slow in developing for people with developmental disabilities. As a result, much of the work done by the Disability Rights Movement was completed by allies, or those without disabilities, parents, friends, and siblings fought for education and acceptance when their loved ones with cognitive disabilities could not. Today, the movement has a social focus to increase this public awareness, as evidenced by the R-Word Campaign. Advocates for the rights of people with mental health disabilities focus mainly on self-determination, and these movements have supported people with disabilities to live as more active participants in society. Access to education and employment have also been a focus of the disability rights movement. Adaptive technologies, enabling people to work jobs they could not have previously, help create access to jobs, access in the classroom has helped improve education opportunities and independence for people with disabilities. Freedom from abuse, neglect, and violations of a persons rights are important goals of the disability rights movement. As a result of the work done through the disability rights movement, significant disability rights legislation was passed in the 1970s through the 1990s in the U. S
19.
Civil liberties
–
Civil liberties or personal freedoms are personal guarantees and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation, without due process. Other civil liberties include the right to own property, the right to defend oneself, within the distinctions between civil liberties and other types of liberty, distinctions exist between positive liberty/positive rights and negative liberty/negative rights. Many contemporary states have a constitution, a bill of rights, or similar constitutional documents that enumerate, the existence of some claimed civil liberties is a matter of dispute, as are the extent of most civil rights. Controversial examples include property rights, reproductive rights, and civil marriage, whether the existence of victimless crimes infringes upon civil liberties is a matter of dispute. Another matter of debate is the suspension or alteration of certain civil liberties in times of war or state of emergency, including whether and to what extent this should occur. The formal concept of civil liberties is often dated back to Magna Carta, the Constitution of Peoples Republic of China, especially its Fundamental Rights and Duties of Citizens, claims to protect many civil liberties. Taiwan, which is separated from China, has its own Constitution, the Fundamental Rights—embodied in Part III of the constitution—guarantee liberties such that all Indians can lead their lives in peace as citizens of India. The six fundamental rights are right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights and right to constitutional remedies. These include individual rights common to most liberal democracies, incorporated in the law of the land and are enforceable in a court of law. Violations of these result in punishments as prescribed in the Indian Penal Code. These rights are neither absolute nor immune from constitutional amendments and they have been aimed at overturning the inequalities of pre-independence social practices. Specifically, they resulted in abolishment of un-touchability and prohibit discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex and they forbid human trafficking and unfree labour. They protect cultural and educational rights of ethnic and religious minorities by allowing them to preserve their languages, all people, irrespective of race, religion, caste or sex, have the right to approach the High Courts or the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights. It is not necessary that the party has to be the one to do so. In public interest, anyone can initiate litigation in the court on their behalf and this is known as Public interest litigation. High Court and Supreme Court judges can also act on their own on the basis of media reports, the Fundamental Rights emphasize equality by guaranteeing to all citizens the access and use of public institutions and protections, irrespective of their background. The rights to life and personal liberty apply for persons of any nationality, while others, such as the freedom of speech, the right to equality in matters of public employment cannot be conferred to overseas citizens of India. Fundamental Rights primarily protect individuals from any arbitrary State actions, for instance, the constitution abolishes untouchability and prohibits begar
20.
Digital rights
–
Internet access is recognized as a right by the laws of several countries. A number of rights have been identified as relevant with regard to the Internet. These include freedom of expression, data protection and privacy and freedom of association, furthermore, the right to education and multilingualism, consumer rights, and capacity building in the context of the right to development have also been identified. The Internet is a public good that should be accessible to all and respectful of the rights of others. What the law permits or prohibits offline must also be the case online, the only widespread international consensus on online material to be censored regards child pornography and cyberterrorism, the article said. This includes the right of access to these technologies, in particular. Estonia, In 2000, the parliament launched a program to expand access to the countryside. The Internet, the government argues, is essential for life in the 21st century, Finland, By July 2010, every person in Finland was to have access to a one-megabit per second broadband connection, according to the Ministry of Transport and Communications. And by 2015, access to a 100 Mbit/s connection, the APC Internet Rights Charter was established by the Association for Progressive Communications at the APC Europe Internet Rights Workshop, held in Prague, February 2001. In December 2003 the World Summit on the Information Society was convened under the auspice of the United Nations and we also reaffirm that democracy, sustainable development, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as good governance at all levels are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. Communication is a social process, a basic human need. It is central to the Information Society, everyone, everywhere should have the opportunity to participate and no one should be excluded from the benefits of the Information Society offers. In 2005, the United Kingdoms Open Rights Group published a digital landscape, documenting the range of organizations. The diagram related groups, individuals, and websites to interest areas, on October 29,2008 the Global Network Initiative was founded upon its Principles on Freedom of Expression and Privacy. Participants in the Initiative include the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Human Rights Watch, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, other companies, human rights NGOs, investors. According to reports Cisco Systems was invited to the initial discussions, Harrington Investments, which proposed that Cisco establish a human rights board, has dismissed the GNI as a voluntary code of conduct having any impact. Chief executive John Harrington called the GNI meaningless noise and instead calls for bylaws to be introduced that force boards of directors to accept human rights responsibilities. GlobeScan Chairman Doug Miller felt, overall, that the poll showed that, Despite worries about privacy and fraud and they think the web is a force for good, and most don’t want governments to regulate it
21.
Linguistic rights
–
Linguistic, or language, rights are the human and civil rights concerning the individual and collective right to choose the language or languages for communication in a private or public atmosphere. Other parameters for analyzing linguistic rights include the degree of territoriality, amount of positivity, orientation in terms of assimilation or maintenance, Linguistic rights in international law are usually dealt in the broader framework of cultural and educational rights. Linguistic rights became more and more prominent throughout the course of history as language came to be seen as a part of nationhood. However, it was not until the 1900s that linguistic rights gained official status in politics, Linguistic rights were first included as an international human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Formal treaty-based language rights are concerned with minority rights. The history of language rights can be split into five phases. Language rights are covered in bilateral agreements, but not in international treaties, Final Act of the Congress of Vienna. The conclusion to Napoleon I’s empire-building was signed by 7 European major powers and it granted the right to use Polish to Poles in Poznan alongside German for official business. Between World I and World War II, Many national constitutions followed this trend. But not all signatories provided rights to minority groups within their own such as United Kingdom, France. Treaties also provided right of complaint to League of Nations and International Court of Justice, International legislation for protection of human rights was undertaken within infrastructure of United Nations. Mainly for individual rights and collective rights to oppressed groups for self-determination, early 1970s onwards, there was a renewed interest in rights of minorities, including language rights of minorities. E. g. UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious, Some make a distinction between language rights and linguistic human rights because the former concept covers a much wider scope. Thus, not all rights are LHR, although all LHR are language rights. One way of distinguishing language rights from LHR is between what is necessary, and what is enrichment-oriented. Necessary rights, as in rights, are those needed for basic needs and for living a dignified life, e. g. Enrichment rights are above basic needs. The most basic definition of linguistic rights is the right of individuals to use their language with other members of their linguistic group, regardless of the status of their language. Individual linguistic rights are provided for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the individual has the right to have the interpreter translate the proceedings, including court documents
22.
Right to property
–
The right to property or right to own property is often classified as a human right for natural persons regarding their possessions. The right to property is one of the most controversial human rights, controversy centres upon who is deemed to have property rights protected, the type of property which is protected, and the reasons for which property can be restricted. In all human rights instruments, either implicit or express restrictions exist on the extent to which property is protected, the European Court of Human Rights has held that the right to property is not absolute and states have a wide degree of discretion to limit the rights. As such the right to property is regarded as a more right than other human rights. States degree of discretion is defined in Handyside v. United Kingdom, the highest economic compensation, following a judgment of the Strasbourg Court on this matter, was given in case Beyeler v. Italy. When the text of the UDHR was negotiated Latin American states argued that the right to property should be limited to the protection of property necessary for subsistence. Their suggestion was opposed, but was enshrined in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, the regional human rights instruments of Europe, Africa and the Americas recognise the right to protection of property to varying degrees. The American Convention on Human Rights recognises the right to protection of property, the ACHR also prohibits usury and other exploitation, which is unique amongst human rights instruments. Article 21 also provides that in case of spoliation the dispossessed people shall have the right to the recovery of its property as well as to adequate compensation. Property rights are enshrined in the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. These international human rights instruments for minorities do not establish a right to property. The right to property was a crucial demand in early quests for political freedom and equality. Because not everybody is a property owner, the right to work was enshrined to allow everybody to attain a standard of living. The protection of property may come into conflict with economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights. To mitigate this the right to property is limited to protect the public interest. Many states also maintain systems of communal and collective ownership, property rights have frequently been regarded as preventing the realisation of human rights for all, through for example slavery and the exploitation of others. Unequal distribution of wealth often follows line of sex, race and minorities, therefore property rights may appear to be part of the problem, in Europe the notion of private property and property rights emerged in the Renaissance as international trade by merchants gave rise to mercantilist ideas. In 16th Century Europe Lutheranism and the Protestant Reformation advanced property rights using biblical terminology, Protestant work ethic and views on mans destiny came to underline social view in emerging capitalist economies in Early modern Europe
23.
Reproductive rights
–
Reproductive rights are legal rights and freedoms relating to reproduction and reproductive health that vary amongst countries around the world. They also include the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion, Reproductive rights began to develop as a subset of human rights at the United Nations 1968 International Conference on Human Rights. States, though, have been slow in incorporating these rights in internationally legally binding instruments, issues related to reproductive rights are some of the most vigorously contested rights issues worldwide, regardless of the populations socioeconomic level, religion or culture. The issue of rights is frequently presented as being of vital importance in discussions. Reproductive rights are a subset of sexual and reproductive health and rights, in 1945, the United Nations Charter included the obligation to promote. Universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without discrimination as to race, sex, language, however, the Charter did not define these rights. Three years later, the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the first international document to delineate human rights. Parents have the right to determine freely and responsibly the number. The 1975 UN International Womens Year Conference echoed the Proclamation of Teheran, the twenty-year Cairo Programme of Action was adopted in 1994 at the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo. The non-binding Programme of Action asserted that governments have a responsibility to meet individuals reproductive needs, the ICPD also addressed issues such as violence against women, sex trafficking, and adolescent health. Unlike previous population conferences, a range of interests from grassroots to government level were represented in Cairo. 179 nations attended the ICPD and overall eleven thousand representatives from governments, NGOs, international agencies, the ICPD did not address the far-reaching implications of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The Cairo Programme of Action was adopted by 184 UN member states, the Beijing Platform demarcated twelve interrelated critical areas of the human rights of women that require advocacy. The Platform framed womens reproductive rights as indivisible, universal and inalienable human rights, in relation to reproductive health, Principle 9 on The Right to Treatment with Humanity while in Detention requires that States shall. Nonetheless, African, Caribbean and Islamic Countries, as well as the Russian Federation, have objected to the use of these principles as Human Rights standards. The first legal textbook on reproductive rights law, Cases on Reproductive Rights and Justice by Melissa Murray, State abuses against reproductive rights have happened both under right-wing and left-wing governments. Some governments have implemented policies of forced sterilizations of undesirable population groups. It also includes the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion, in the exercise of this right, they should take into account the needs of their living and future children and their responsibilities towards the community
24.
Self-determination
–
The right of peoples to self-determination is a cardinal principle in modern international law, binding, as such, on the United Nations as authoritative interpretation of the Charter’s norms. The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, nor what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, neither does it state what the delimitation between peoples should be—nor what constitutes a people. There are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination, National aspirations must be respected, people may now be dominated and governed only by their own consent. Self determination is not a phrase, it is an imperative principle of action. By extension the term self-determination has come to mean the free choice of ones own acts without external compulsion, during, and after, the Industrial Revolution many groups of people recognized their shared history, geography, language, and customs. Such groups often pursued independence and sovereignty over territory, but sometimes a different sense of autonomy has been pursued or achieved, the world possessed several traditional, continental empires such as the Ottoman, Russian, Austrian/Habsburg, and the Qing Empire. During the early 19th century, competition in Europe produced multiple wars, after this conflict, the British Empire became dominant and entered its imperial century, while nationalism became a powerful political ideology in Europe. Later, after the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, New Imperialism was unleashed with France and later Germany establishing colonies in Asia, the Pacific, Japan also emerged as a new power. The Ottoman Empire, Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, Qing Empire, all ignored notions of self-determination for those governed. The French Revolution was motivated similarly and legitimatized the ideas of self-determination on that Old World continent, within the New World during the early 19th century, most of the nations of Spanish America achieved independence from Spain. The United States supported that status, as policy in the relative to European colonialism. Such support, however, never became official government policy, due to balancing of other national interests, meanwhile, in Europe itself there was a rise of nationalism, with nations such as Greece, Hungary, Poland and Bulgaria seeking or winning their independence. Karl Marx supported such nationalism, believing it might be a condition to social reform. In 1914 Vladimir Lenin wrote, would be wrong to interpret the right to self-determination as meaning anything, woodrow Wilson revived Americas commitment to self-determination, at least for European states, during World War I. When the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia in November 1917 and they also supported the right of all nations, including colonies, to self-determination. The 1918 Constitution of the Soviet Union acknowledged the right of secession for its constituent republics and this presented a challenge to Wilsons more limited demands. The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in March 1918 led to Russias exit from the war, however, this imposition of states where some nationalities were given power over nationalities who disliked and distrusted them eventually helped lead to World War II. Also Germany lost land after WWI, Northern Slesvig voted to return to Denmark after a referendum, the League of Nations was proposed as much as a means of consolidating these new states, as a path to peace
25.
Human right to water and sanitation
–
The Human Right to Water and Sanitation was recognised as a human right by the United Nations General Assembly on 28 July 2010. The HRWS has been recognized in law through human rights treaties, declarations. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights of 1948 and International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights of 1966 implicitly recognized the HRWS. Other treaties that recognize the HRWS include the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. The first resolutions about the HRWS were passed by the UN General Assembly, a revised UN resolution in 2015 highlighted that the two rights were separate but equal. The clearest definition of the right to water was issued by the United Nations Committee on Economic. It stated, The human right to water entitles everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal, the HRWS obliges governments to ensure that people can enjoy clean, available, acceptable, accessible, and affordable water and sanitation. The ICESCR requires signatory countries to achieve and respect all human rights, including those of water. They should work quickly and efficiently to increase access and improve service, All states have ratified either a human rights convention or a political declaration which recognizes the HRWS. Access to clean water is a problem for many parts of the world. Acceptable sources include “household connections, public standpipes, boreholes, protected dug wells, protected springs and rainwater collections”. Although 9 percent of the population lacks access to water, there are “regions particularly delayed, such as Sub-Saharan Africa. ”The UN further emphasizes that “about 1.5 million children under the age of five die each year and 443 million school days are lost because of water-. The International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights of 1966 codified the economic, social, neither of these early documents explicitly recognized human rights to water and sanitation. Several later international human rights conventions, however, had provisions that explicitly recognized rights to water, the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women has Article 14. States parties shall pursue full implementation of this right and, in particular, to combat disease and malnutrition, including within the framework of primary health care, through, inter alia… the provision of adequate nutritious foods and clean drinking water. Scholars also called attention to the importance of possible UN recognition of rights to water. Two early efforts to define the right to water came from law professor Stephen McCaffrey of the University of the Pacific in 1992. McCaffrey stated that Such a right could be envisaged as part and parcel of the right to food or sustenance, the right to health, or most fundamentally, the right to life
26.
Patriot (American Revolution)
–
Patriots were those colonists of the Thirteen Colonies who rebelled against British control during the American Revolution and in July 1776 declared the United States of America an independent nation. Their rebellion was based on the philosophy of republicanism, as expressed by spokesmen such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams. They were opposed by the Loyalists who instead supported continued British rule, as a group, Patriots represented a wide array of social, economic and ethnic backgrounds. The critics of British rule called themselves Whigs after 1768, identifying members of the British Whig party. The Oxford English Dictionary third definition of Patriot is A person actively opposing enemy forces occupying his or her country, a member of a resistance movement, originally used of those who opposed and fought the British in the American War of Independence. The earliest citation is a 1773 letter by Benjamin Franklin, in Britain at the time, patriot had a negative connotation, and was used, says Samuel Johnson as a negative epithet for a factious disturber of the government. During the Revolution these persons became known primarily as Loyalists, afterward, many emigrated north to the remaining British territories in what is now modern Canada. There they called themselves the United Empire Loyalists, many Patriots were active before 1775 in groups such as the Sons of Liberty. The most prominent leaders of the Patriots are referred to today by Americans as the Founding Fathers, the Patriots came from many different backgrounds. Among the most active of the Patriots group were highly educated, however, without the support of the ordinary men and women, such as farmers, lawyers, merchants, seamstresses, homemakers, shopkeepers, and ministers, the struggle for independence would have failed. With a white population of about 2.5 million, that makes about 380,000 to 500,000 Loyalists, the great majority of them remained in America, since only about 80,000 Loyalists left the United States 1775–1783. They went to Canada, Britain, Florida or the West Indies, to understand how people made the choice between being a Patriot or a Loyalist, historians have compared the motivations and personalities of leading men on each side. Labaree has identified eight characteristics that differentiated the two groups, psychologically, Loyalists were older, better established, and more likely to resist innovation than the Patriots. Men who were alienated by physical attacks on Royal officials took the Loyalist position, most men who wanted to find a compromise solution wound up on the Loyalist side, while the proponents of immediate action became Patriots. Some Loyalists were procrastinators who believed that independence was bound to some day, but wanted to postpone the moment. Loyalists were cautious and afraid of anarchy or tyranny that might come from mob rule, Patriots made an effort to use. Finally, Labaree argues that Loyalists were pessimists who lacked the Patriots confidence that independence lay ahead, the Patriot faction came to reject taxes imposed by legislatures in which the tax-payer was not represented. No taxation without representation, was their slogan, referring to the lack of representation in the British Parliament, the British countered there was virtual representation, that is, all members of Parliament represented the interests of all the citizens of the British Empire
27.
Thirteen Colonies
–
The Thirteen Colonies were a group of British colonies on the east coast of North America founded in the 17th and 18th centuries that declared independence in 1776 and formed the United States. The Thirteen Colonies had very similar political, constitutional, and legal systems and they were part of Britains possessions in the New World, which also included colonies in present-day Canada and the Caribbean, as well as East and West Florida. However, the Thirteen Colonies had a degree of self-government and active local elections. In the 1750s, the colonies began collaborating with each other instead of dealing directly with Britain, Colonial decisions were subject to approval by the governor and the home government. There were also substantial populations of African slaves in some of the colonies, especially Virginia, the Carolinas, the names of the colonies were chosen by the founders and proprietors, subject to royal approval, and given in the founding charters. Nine of the thirteen chose to include in their names the term Province of, later residents tended to drop the ambiguous terminology, as in the map shown in the article Province of New Jersey, which is labeled simply East Jersey and West Jersey. In July 1776, they formed a new nation called the United States of America, the new nation achieved that goal by winning the American Revolutionary War with the aid of France, the Netherlands, and Spain. The American flag features thirteen horizontal stripes which represent these original thirteen colonies, besides these thirteen colonies, Britain had another dozen in the New World. Those in the British West Indies, Newfoundland, the Province of Quebec, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Bermuda, and East and West Florida remained loyal to the crown throughout the war. The British crown had recently acquired those lands, and many of the issues facing the Thirteen Colonies did not apply to them, especially in the case of Quebec. Contemporary documents usually list the thirteen colonies of British North America in geographical order, the consolidation collapsed after the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89, and the nine former colonies re-established their separate identities in 1689. Massachusetts Bay Colony Settled in 1630 by Puritans from England, the colonial charter was revoked in 1684, and a new charter was issued in 1691 establishing an enlarged Province of Massachusetts Bay. Province of Maine Settled in 1622, the Massachusetts Bay Colony claimed the Maine territory in the 1650s, then limited to present-day southernmost Maine. Parts of Maine east of the Kennebec River were also part of New York in the half of the 17th century. These areas were made part of the Province of Massachusetts Bay in the charter of 1691. Plymouth Colony Settled in 1620 by the Pilgrims, plymouth was merged into the Province of Massachusetts Bay in the charter of 1691. Saybrook Colony Founded in 1635 and merged with Connecticut Colony in 1644, New Haven Colony Settled in late 1637. New Netherland Extensive region centered about New Amsterdam at the tip of Manhattan Island
28.
English people
–
The English are a nation and an ethnic group native to England, who speak the English language. The English identity is of medieval origin, when they were known in Old English as the Angelcynn. Their ethnonym is derived from the Angles, one of the Germanic peoples who migrated to Great Britain around the 5th century AD, England is one of the countries of the United Kingdom. Collectively known as the Anglo-Saxons, they founded what was to become England along with the later Danes, Normans, in the Acts of Union 1707, the Kingdom of England was succeeded by the Kingdom of Great Britain. Over the years, English customs and identity have become closely aligned with British customs. The English people are the source of the English language, the Westminster system and these and other English cultural characteristics have spread worldwide, in part as a result of the former British Empire. The concept of an English nation is far older than that of the British nation, many recent immigrants to England have assumed a solely British identity, while others have developed dual or mixed identities. Use of the word English to describe Britons from ethnic minorities in England is complicated by most non-white people in England identifying as British rather than English. In their 2004 Annual Population Survey, the Office for National Statistics compared the ethnic identities of British people with their national identity. They found that while 58% of white people in England described their nationality as English and it is unclear how many British people consider themselves English. Following complaints about this, the 2011 census was changed to allow respondents to record their English, Welsh, Scottish, another complication in defining the English is a common tendency for the words English and British to be used interchangeably, especially overseas. In his study of English identity, Krishan Kumar describes a common slip of the tongue in which people say English, I mean British. He notes that this slip is made only by the English themselves and by foreigners. Kumar suggests that although this blurring is a sign of Englands dominant position with the UK and it tells of the difficulty that most English people have of distinguishing themselves, in a collective way, from the other inhabitants of the British Isles. In 1965, the historian A. J. P. Taylor wrote, When the Oxford History of England was launched a generation ago and it meant indiscriminately England and Wales, Great Britain, the United Kingdom, and even the British Empire. Foreigners used it as the name of a Great Power and indeed continue to do so, bonar Law, by origin a Scotch Canadian, was not ashamed to describe himself as Prime Minister of England Now terms have become more rigorous. The use of England except for a geographic area brings protests and this version of history is now regarded by many historians as incorrect, on the basis of more recent genetic and archaeological research. The 2016 study authored by Stephan Schiffels et al, the remaining portion of English DNA is primarily French, introduced in a migration after the end of the Ice Age
29.
American Revolution
–
The British responded by imposing punitive laws on Massachusetts in 1774 known as the Coercive Acts, following which Patriots in the other colonies rallied behind Massachusetts. Tensions escalated to the outbreak of fighting between Patriot militia and British regulars at Lexington and Concord in April 1775, the conflict then developed into a global war, during which the Patriots fought the British and Loyalists in what became known as the American Revolutionary War. The Continental Congress determined King George IIIs rule to be tyrannical and infringing the rights as Englishmen. The Patriot leadership professed the political philosophies of liberalism and republicanism to reject monarchy and aristocracy, Congress rejected British proposals requiring allegiance to the monarchy and abandonment of independence. The British were forced out of Boston in 1776, but then captured and they blockaded the ports and captured other cities for brief periods, but failed to defeat Washingtons forces. After a failed Patriot invasion of Canada, a British army was captured at the Battle of Saratoga in late 1777, a combined American–French force captured a second British army at Yorktown in 1781, effectively ending the war in the United States. The Treaty of Paris in 1783 formally ended the conflict, confirming the new nations complete separation from the British Empire. The United States took possession of all the territory east of the Mississippi River and south of the Great Lakes, with the British retaining control of Canada. Among the significant results of the revolution was the creation of a new Constitution of the United States. Historians typically begin their histories of the American Revolution with the British victory in the French and Indian War in 1763, the lands west of Quebec and west of a line running along the crest of the Allegheny mountains became Indian territory, temporarily barred to settlement. For the prior history, see Thirteen Colonies, in 1764, Parliament passed the Currency Act to restrain the use of paper money which British merchants saw as a means to evade debt payments. Parliament also passed the Sugar Act, imposing customs duties on a number of articles, none did and Parliament passed the Stamp Act in March 1765 which imposed direct taxes on the colonies for the first time. All official documents, newspapers, almanacs, and pamphlets—even decks of playing cards—were required to have the stamps, the colonists did not object that the taxes were high, but because they had no representation in the Parliament. Benjamin Franklin testified in Parliament in 1766 that Americans already contributed heavily to the defense of the Empire, stationing a standing army in Great Britain during peacetime was politically unacceptable. London had to deal with 1,500 politically well-connected British officers who became redundant, in 1765, the Sons of Liberty formed. They used public demonstrations, boycott, violence, and threats of violence to ensure that the British tax laws were unenforceable, in Boston, the Sons of Liberty burned the records of the vice admiralty court and looted the home of chief justice Thomas Hutchinson. Several legislatures called for united action, and nine colonies sent delegates to the Stamp Act Congress in New York City in October 1765, moderates led by John Dickinson drew up a Declaration of Rights and Grievances stating that taxes passed without representation violated their rights as Englishmen. Colonists emphasized their determination by boycotting imports of British merchandise, the Parliament at Westminster saw itself as the supreme lawmaking authority throughout all British possessions and thus entitled to levy any tax without colonial approval
30.
United States Declaration of Independence
–
Instead they formed a new nation—the United States of America. John Adams was a leader in pushing for independence, which was passed on July 2 with no opposing vote cast, a committee of five had already drafted the formal declaration, to be ready when Congress voted on independence. The term Declaration of Independence is not used in the document itself, John Adams persuaded the committee to select Thomas Jefferson to compose the original draft of the document, which Congress would edit to produce the final version. The next day, John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail, The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, but Independence Day is actually celebrated on July 4, the date that the Declaration of Independence was approved. After ratifying the text on July 4, Congress issued the Declaration of Independence in several forms and it was initially published as the printed Dunlap broadside that was widely distributed and read to the public. The source copy used for printing has been lost. Jeffersons original draft, complete with changes made by John Adams and Benjamin Franklin, the best known version of the Declaration, a signed copy that is popularly regarded as the official document, is displayed at the National Archives in Washington, D. C. This engrossed copy was ordered by Congress on July 19, the sources and interpretation of the Declaration have been the subject of much scholarly inquiry. Having served its purpose in announcing independence, references to the text of the Declaration were few in the following years. Abraham Lincoln made it the centerpiece of his rhetoric, and his policies and this has been called one of the best-known sentences in the English language, containing the most potent and consequential words in American history. The passage came to represent a standard to which the United States should strive. Believe me, dear Sir, there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose, and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America. By the time that the Declaration of Independence was adopted in July 1776, relations had been deteriorating between the colonies and the mother country since 1763. Parliament enacted a series of measures to increase revenue from the colonies, such as the Stamp Act of 1765, Parliament believed that these acts were a legitimate means of having the colonies pay their fair share of the costs to keep them in the British Empire. Many colonists, however, had developed a different conception of the empire, the colonies were not directly represented in Parliament, and colonists argued that Parliament had no right to levy taxes upon them. This tax dispute was part of a divergence between British and American interpretations of the British Constitution and the extent of Parliaments authority in the colonies. In the colonies, however, the idea had developed that the British Constitution recognized certain fundamental rights that no government could violate, after the Townshend Acts, some essayists even began to question whether Parliament had any legitimate jurisdiction in the colonies at all
31.
George Mason
–
George Mason was a Virginia planter and politician, and a delegate to the U. S. Constitutional Convention of 1787, one of three delegates who refused to sign the constitution, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which Mason principally authored, served as a basis for the United States Bill of Rights, of which he has been deemed the father. Mason was born in 1725, most likely in what is now Fairfax County and his father died when he was young, and his mother managed the family estates until he came of age. He married in 1750, built Gunston Hall, and lived the life of a squire, supervising his lands, family. He briefly served in the House of Burgesses and involved himself in community affairs, Mason prepared the first draft of the Declaration of Rights in 1776, and his words formed much of the text adopted by the final Revolutionary Virginia Convention. He also wrote a constitution for the state, Thomas Jefferson and others sought to have the convention adopt their ideas, Mason was named one of his states delegates to the Constitutional Convention and traveled to Philadelphia, his only lengthy trip outside Virginia. Many clauses in the document bear his stamp, as he was active in the convention for months before deciding that he could not sign it, long obscure, Mason is now recognized for his contributions to the United States, and to Virginia. George Masons great-grandfather, George Mason I, had been a Cavalier, militarily defeated in the English Civil War and he had been born in 1629 at Pershore, in the English county of Worcestershire. His son, George Mason II, was the first to move to what in 1742 became Fairfax County, George Mason III served in the House of Burgesses and, like his father, was county lieutenant. George Mason IVs mother, Ann Thomson Mason, was the daughter of a former Attorney General of Virginia who had immigrated from London and was of a Yorkshire family. The Masons lived in a colonial Virginia that had few roads, as most commerce was carried on Chesapeake Bay or along the waters of its tributaries, such as the Potomac, most settlement took place near the rivers, through which planters could trade with the world. Thus, colonial Virginia initially developed few towns, since estates were largely self-sufficient, even the capital, Williamsburg, saw little activity when the legislature was not in session. Local politics was dominated by large landowners like the Masons, the Virginia economy rose and fell with tobacco, the main crop, which was raised mostly for export to Britain. Into this world was born George Mason, fourth of that name and he may have been born at his fathers plantation on Dogues Neck, but this is uncertain as his parents also lived on their lands across the Potomac in Maryland. On March 5,1735, George Mason III died when his boat capsized crossing the Potomac. His widow Ann would raise their son George and two siblings as co-guardian with lawyer John Mercer. She selected property at Chopawamsic Creek as her house and there lived with her children. In 1736, George began his education with a Mr. Williams, georges studies began at his mothers house, but the following year, he was boarded out to a Mrs. Simpson in Maryland, with Williams continuing as teacher through 1739
32.
Founding Fathers of the United States
–
Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin were members of the Committee of Five that drafted the Declaration of Independence. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay were authors of the The Federalist Papers, Jay, Adams and Franklin negotiated the Treaty of Paris that would end the American Revolutionary War. Washington was Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army and was President of the Constitutional Convention, according to the CIA, Washington, Jay and Franklin helped define the powers of the Executive Branch All held additional important roles in the early government of the United States. The term Founding Fathers is sometimes used to refer to the Signers of the version of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Of the 55 Framers, only 39 were signers of the Constitution, a further subset of Founding Founders includes those who signed the Continental Association or the Articles of Confederation. The phrase Founding Fathers is a twentieth century appellation and was first coined by Warren G. Harding in 1916, the First Continental Congress met briefly in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1774 and consisted of fifty-six delegates from twelve of the Thirteen Colonies that became the United States of America. On the list of attendees was George Washington, who would soon be out of military retirement to command the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. Also in attendance was Patrick Henry, and John Adams, who were elected by their respective colonial assemblies, other notable delegates included Samuel Adams from Massachusetts, John Dickinson from Pennsylvania and New Yorks John Jay. This congress in addition to formulating appeals to the British crown, when the Second Continental Congress came together on May 10,1775, it was, in effect, a reconvening of the First Congress. Many of the same 56 delegates who attended the first meeting participated in the second, notable new arrivals included Benjamin Franklin and Robert Morris of Pennsylvania, John Hancock of Massachusetts, and John Witherspoon of New Jersey. Hancock was elected Congress President two weeks into the session when Peyton Randolph was summoned back to Virginia to preside over the House of Burgesses, Thomas Jefferson replaced Randolph in the Virginia congressional delegation. The second Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence, Witherspoon was the only active clergyman to sign the Declaration. He also signed the Articles of Confederation and attended the New Jersey convention that ratified the Federal Constitution, the newly founded country of the United States had to create a new government to replace the British Parliament. The Americans adopted the Articles of Confederation, a declaration that established a government which was made up of a one-house legislature. Its ratification by all thirteen colonies gave the second Congress a new name, the Congress of the Confederation, later, the Constitutional Convention took place during the summer of 1787, in Philadelphia. The delegates elected George Washington to preside over the Convention, the result of the Convention was the United States Constitution. The Founding Fathers represented a cross-section of 18th-century American leadership, almost all of them were well-educated men of means who were leaders in their communities. Many were also prominent in national affairs, virtually every one had taken part in the American Revolution, at least 29 had served in the Continental Army, most of them in positions of command
