Can you find a tree that bears fruits without having roots? Can you find a light bulb shining so bright without a generator or any source providing the electricity? Can you find a an artwork, a novel, a movie or any human creation which has not originated from the creative mind of the artist, the writer, the producer or director? Can you find any law that is not based upon a basic one called a Constitution?
From where do the right to expression, right to religion, right to abode, right to whatever, originated? Unless these rights came from some foundation that we could agree upon as inalienable or something that must be a source that is indestructible, we might as well question why they should be called rights. For if we base something upon that which cannot stand on its own, then both would logically collapse and we find ourselves in a very chaotic situation where the only measure of things would be the survival of the fittest in a very naughty way!
The US Declaration of Independence may not be the most perfect document on earth but it at least made a very important proposition - which most if not all Nations on earth have now also accepted: the inalienability of the Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
I don't know if we could find any other right which could be of more importance to the above three for as I personally see it - and logically too - they are what we may consider as the Root, Trunk and Branches of the Tree of Rights. All other rights emanate from these three like leaves and fruits that people pick to enjoy and satiate their hunger. All other rights are sought for by people for the sake of enjoying happiness; and unless one is free, one cannot pursue happiness; while if one is not alive, how can he experience freedom?
To make our discussion short, yes, I am saying that Life is the very foundation of all Rights. For how can rights to liberty, happiness and others be enjoyed by one who is Dead or Non-living? Do we acknowledge that chairs, tables, books and cars have their rights? Of course not. We give them value not because of themselves but because of ownership. Isn't it because of their acknowledgement that animals are also living beings that there are people who advocate for animal rights?
Hence unless there is something wrong with the way we think and understand things on this earth, I am sure that no one would argue about the primacy of Life and its significance as the Foundation of All Other Rights. To deny this would mean the denial of the importance of a basis for anything we do or believe in. As a matter of fact, it would put things in a very awkward position of instability: just imagine a country without a Constitution and laws would have no basis but the whim of those in power. How would authority be respected, implemented and secured if there would be no basis in a Constitution but mere laws which could be changed depending on the whim of the majority which may not be in accordance with what is beneficial to all?
The Right to Life cannot be disregarded, denied or destroyed in order to set things on their proper perspective. The protection and promotion of this very fundamental right is not only necessary but essential for the stability of human existence. The moment this Primary Right is denied, we sign the death sentence for all of humanity.
This may be a simple discussion about the Significance of the Primacy of the Right to Life but I think and honestly and sincerely believe that no man in his right mind and exercising his proper intellectual operations would deny the simple fact that without Life nothing IS and WOULD BE!
No comments:
Post a Comment