PRRD’s “Your concern is Human Rights, mine is Human Lives” became a famous statement in the SONA to some and infamous to others. As I try to dissect the impact of such statement, I’ll be stretching the edges of my cognitive ability when I’m talking about things because I’m in the realm of what Du30 wanted to impart.
In a disparate stream of people We actually look like we’re different species, yeah, we’re very different people but what is in common among us is that we’re able to have a conversation and that we should be aiming at making things better rather than worse because that is what unifies us.
In simplest terms, the difference between human lives and human rights is that Human rights arise simply by being a human being. It’s just like without the tree, there are no branches to see, and so, there are no human rights if there’s no human being. So, you’ve got to be very honest about your capacity to manifest that will as a human being. One who is able to exercise his will to where he is a master of himself, that person is alive. One who isn’t is not alive. A life worthwhile is life, a life isn’t worthwhile is not life.
With this philosophical stand, a person influenced by drugs or any substance that will affect his physical and mental equilibrium is not a master of himself, therefore, is not alive. But even if he appears to be physically existing but his life is not worthwhile, he still has no life with a full capacity of manifesting his will. And since he has no life, he has no human rights, especially if he is a menace of the society, if he breaks the traditional standard of morality, and, more so, if he kills the innocents.
No comments:
Post a Comment