Introduction
Human rights can be considered as a bundle of inalienable rights that each person has by being alive. It consists of the right to live, the right to freedom (i.e., religious or otherwise), the right to work, and other such rights that apply to human activity in general. The acknowledgment of such rights under the Universal Declaration of Human rights is the basis behind the current freedoms that many people around the world enjoy today (Allan 251). However, before the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human rights, various religions such as Christianity, Islam and Hinduism also had their own set of rights that helped to create the basic structure that helped define social interaction and cultures in the past.
What must be understood is that the concept of “human rights” is not new, rather, it has been around for thousands of years and has been utilized as the basis behind how people are expected to interact with each other in society. These rights are expounded upon and protected by societal laws, such as the code of Hammurabi in early Mesopotamia that was created to both maintain social functions and protect individuals from being subjected to acts that violated their rights defined by law (Allan 254). However, it should be noted that these rights depended on the society that was present at the time and its religion. One interesting facet that must be remembered is that there are commonly held rights that are espoused by religious doctrines that are similar in various religions, for example:
- The 10 commandments of the Bible:
- “thou shall not kill” (protection of the right to life)
- “thou shall not steal” (protection of personal properties)
- The Qur’an:
- “As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands” (protection of personal properties)”
- the one who killed a single innocent person on this earth is like he killed entire mankind, and the one who saves the life of a single person is like he saved entire mankind” (protection of the right to life).
Despite this, the fact remains that there are numerous differences in their application of human rights as well. This paper will examine how various religions apply the concept of human rights and how they differ from one another. It is expected that through this analysis, the concept of “human justice in all religions” will be expounded upon and will show how different human rights and methods of their application are viewed by religions. It is the belief of this paper that different cultures view human rights in different ways due to how they are influenced and controlled by the religions that are dominant within their society.
Differences in the Application of Human Rights amongst Religions
Islam
The application of human rights in religion is varied, especially when comparing Islam and Christianity. While both religious espouse that women have rights, they go about this in drastically different ways. For example, one of the traditional practices in Islam is when a woman is going to marry is that she is to be provided by the dowry. Under their doctrine, this is a human right since it gives her a certain degree of “worth” in terms of what she brings to the family, as well as her capacity to contribute towards the family’s budget (ex: women actually play a considerable role in entrepreneurship in Islamic culture and often use their dowries to fund business ventures). This practice was enacted due to the patriarchal nature of Muslim society, as well as the fact that the Qur’an dictates the need for a wife to support her husband. In this particular instance, this comes in the form of creating and minding a business (Mitchem 128).
When it comes to the issue of homosexuality, the Qur’an states:(7:81) “Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?”
As such, being a homosexual is considered as an aberration, though it should be noted that there have been attempts at correcting the behavior through counseling and various other forms of positive treatment.
Christianity
Under Christianity, the protection of human rights does have similar themes to Islam wherein it also advocates for the protection of life and property; however, the issue of female rights is far different and does not have the same entrepreneurial context (Mitchem 129). First and foremost, it should be noted that under Islam, entrepreneurship is considered as an inherent right. Namely, whether a person is a man or a woman, they have the right to engage in commerce since it is an important aspect of their culture. Women under Christianity do have fewer rights than men; however, the influence of Christian religious doctrines in European society at the time enabled women to have greater economic, social and sexual rights resulting in them being able to work, choose their husbands and have greater social freedoms (Mitchem 129).
However, unlike in Islam, the Christian context of women’s rights does not have the same “entrepreneurial” aspect in that Christian women are not given dowries. The result is that while Christian women gradually gained the same rights as men, they did not have the financial support that was inherent under the “dowry rights” within Islamic culture (Mitchem 129). From this particular perspective, it can be seen that the religions often have “trade-offs” so to speak, when it comes to the application of particular rights.
On the other hand, while Christianity advocates for equal rights for homosexuals, as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (an official document by the church from Pope John Paul the Second), this does not extend to the sanctity of marriage.
Hinduism
In comparing the human rights advocated by Hinduism and those utilized in Islam and Christianity, a similar trend can be seen regarding the dowry system and the rights of women. However, these rights are not as reserved as compared to Islam, nor as “liberal” as those by Christianity (Mitchem 130). Instead, what exists is a sort of middle ground wherein women are given almost the same rights as men, but there are still numerous cultural restrictions brought about through religious doctrine, which limits a woman’s capacity involving economic activity and marriage (Mitchem, 130).
On the other hand, Hinduism does have a far more liberal view on homosexuality as compared to Islam or Christianity. In it, Sanskrit texts such as the Narada-Smriti and Sushruta Samhita view the sexual interaction between same-sex individuals as a manifestation of humanity’s third gender or even a means in which sexuality and passion are expressed. While individuals in Indian society do not want such actions to be described as homosexuality and instead view them as an expression of passion, the fact remains that within the context of homosexual behavior, Hinduism embraces and even celebrates this notion to a certain degree (Kendhammer, 475) though it should be noted that being a homosexual in India today is viewed in a distinctly negative light due to external influences on Indian culture (i.e., the British), which sees being gay as a sinful and socially inappropriate form of behavior.
Examining how Religion Influences Culture
It is interesting to note that what constitutes human rights is a very broad concept, especially when applied to various religions that are widespread in the present word and that have very different views as to what can be described as individual’s rights within a particular society. Human rights, when applied to Islam, Christianity, Hinduism can be considered as a direct result of religious socialization wherein its inclination towards granting specific rights to men, women and children were influenced by the specific society and culture. In various instances where religion was fostered, often unwillingly, onto a populace and that in effect changed their perception of human rights and how it was applied. For example, before the arrival of the Spanish to the Philippines, rights were equal among men and women in the country.
However, after the arrival of Spanish colonizers and imposition of Catholicism upon the native population, this changed the human rights dynamic wherein men were considered to have more rights and more privileges as compared to women (Kendhammer 479). It is quite interesting to note that when examining the various countries where European colonization occurred, it can be seen that religious fervor and the proliferation of devout followers is a common theme among such countries at present. European colonizers utilized religious conversion as a means by which the local populace could be influenced and, as a result, subverted the practices that were in existence at the time with something more akin to what the European colonizers wanted. As a result, this changed how local populations viewed human rights and how they were subsequently applied. Through the examples presented in this section, it can be seen that religion has a definite impact on how a culture applies human rights.
How does the application of human rights in religions change?
The religious culture that defines a particular society tends to change over time into something completely different, and this also impacts how human rights are applied. Despite this people, society, and what can be defined as “religious traditions” are still considered part of the original culture despite the drastic changes that occurred. For example, when looking at modern England, the religious culture that embodies it within the current era is drastically different from what it was during the 1880s, the 1400s and even far before that (Pitt 398-408). For example, human rights related to homosexuality, equal rights for women and other such developments over the past 100 years were unthinkable 500 or 700 years ago. When examining such a disposition in classification, it is seen that people in the past became so used to the characteristics that defined a particular gender or stereotype preconception that despite the latter proving otherwise the same “standard” continued to stick, especially when it related religious stereotyping (Pitt 398-408).
For example, despite women showing that they were just as capable as men when it came to certain tasks, the same gender stereotype preconception continued to exist (which classifies women as being the weaker sex), which results in fewer rights, privileges, and distinction being given to their more than capable male counterparts. Such aspects are, of course, no longer seen in the present and, as such, can be considered evidence of a shift in society which had a distinct impact on religious socialization. When examining the concept of change in the way in which human rights are viewed by religions, it can be stated that changes apply to nearly all modern societies wherein what was used to define Catholic, Muslim, Christian, Hindu and Buddhist human rights has gone through various iterations and changes over hundreds of years. Human rights in these religions as they are today cannot even be considered as a similar facsimile of the original religious cultures of their respective societies (Pitt 398-408). While it may be true that some vestiges of the original religious human rights can still be found in the modern world, it is obvious indeed that there are more differences than similarities.
Laws Involving Human Rights and Homosexuality
The HRA (Human Rights Act) was introduced in the United Kingdom in the year 1998 as a means of implementing an internal judicial method of addressing human rights concerns (i.e., cases which cross into apparent violations of human rights). Some interpretations have created positive results in the form of allowing gay marriages within the UK by the middle of 2014. To understand how the HRA applies to gay marriages, it is necessary to carefully examine the context of the act regarding the respect for private life once again. While article 8 of the HRA expressly protects the privacy of individuals, it has also been interpreted to encompass the protection of the individual’s right to develop their personality (Hill 98).
This has to include the basis behind the protection of homosexuals and transsexuals within the UK. The reason for this was that present-day legislation in the UK legalized same-sex civil marriages. While the original ECHR did mention the protection of an individual’s sexual orientation to a certain degree, it did not expressly focus on giving same-sex couples or transsexuals the right to marry. It was only through an interpretation of the HRA based on the “spirit” behind the legislation found in article 8 that present-day legislation allowed members of the LGBT community to get married (Hill 99). From a certain point of view, it can be stated that the HRA was partly responsible for encouraging the passing of such a law since it acted as a precedent, which justified the implementation of the gay marriage.
Conclusion
Based on everything that has been presented in this report so far, it can be stated that different cultures view human rights in different ways due to how they are influenced and controlled by the religions that are dominant within their society. Speaking about Christianity, Hinduism, and Islam in the present-day society, it should be noted that they have undergone some changes that are as a result of the influence of the modern world.
Works Cited
Allan, Alfred. “Are Human Rights Redundant in the Ethical Codes of Psychologists?” Ethics & Behavior 23.4 (2013): 251-265. Print.
Hill, Mark. “Religion and Human Rights: Twentieth Annual International Law and Religion Symposium.” Ecclesiastical Law Journal 16.1 (2014): 97-99. Print.
Kendhammer, Brandon. “Islam and The Language of Human Rights in Nigeria: “Rights Talk” and Religion in Domestic Politics.” Journal of Human Rights 12.4 (2013): 469-490. Print.
Mitchem, Stephanie Y. “Women’s Human Rights-And Religion.” Cross Currents 63.2 (2013): 128-130.
Pitt, Gwyneth. “Taking Religion Seriously.” Industrial Law Journal 42.4 (2013): 398-408. Print.