Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

Jihad always been but big difference when the people know the difference of RAW 101


Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being."[1] Human rights are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for everyone). These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in both national and international law.[2] The doctrine of human rights in international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights [3] states, "if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights." Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of The Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights.[5] Ancient societies 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". [6] The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics.[7] The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition that became prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentieth century. Gelling as social activism and political rhetoric in many nations put it high on the world agenda.[8] All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)[9]

Tacit: Unspoken, implicit, inferred, implied, understood, unstated Inalienable: unchallengeable, absolute, immutable, not able to be forfeited, unassailable, incontrovertible, indisputable, undeniable Essential: Necessary, vital, indispensable, important, crucial, critical Demonstrably: Obviously, palpably, patently, evidently, noticeably, perceptibly, discernibly, apparently Sane: Rational, sensible, reasonable, sound, normal, wise, commonsensical (Antonymn) Mad Giving credence to that which is least apt to be mistaken by humankind needing only to be a sane human to know what is receptive to a fellow human ergo knowing the difference between

RAW Right and Wrong

What's it all about Alfie?

Insane considered legally incompetent or irresponsible because of a psychiatric disorder showing a complete lack of reason or foresight people legally considered as psychiatrically disordered people who are considered legally incompetent or irresponsible because of a psychiatric disorder http://www.scribd.com/doc/113882977/Spirit-Intent-Precedence-de-Jure-Constitution-or-Romans-13Gaming-the-System-de-Facto

HE - Human Enslavement De facto

Complicit: It was clear that some of the staff were complicit in the attempt to cover up the scandal. Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day.

the question of what is meant by a

is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate.[4]

RAW 101
Right and Wrong

According to some theories of democracy, popular sovereignty is the founding principle of such a system.[3] However, the democratic principle has also been expressed as "the freedom to call something into being which did not exist before,

which was not given

and which therefore, strictly speaking, could not be known."[4] This type of freedom, which is connected to

human "natality,"
or the capacity to begin anew, sees democracy as "not only a political system [but]

an ideal,
an aspiration, really, intimately connected to and dependent upon a picture of what it is to be human

of what it is a human should be to be fully human."[5]

Reality is the Truth impervious to perception yet precisely due to perception Truth is that which would be observed by God whether or not He exists or whether or not one believes He exists

Simply reality sanely dealt with


DOO DOO Difference of Opinion Dependent on outlook So a grade 5 teacher asks the class to draw a picture of WITS What Is True Starvation?

Whats that you got there Mary?

A plate with bread crumbs teacher Wrong Mary still can eat the bread crumbs

Whats that Robert?

A fish skeleton teacher Wrong Robby still head and tail to eat

and what did you draw Johnny?

That's an asshole with cobwebs on it teach ... if that ain't starvation I don't know what the fuck is!!!

Johnny didn't get it ... I don't get it ... I thought he had it right ... In retrospect Johnny did get it ... Right?