Options
'Love is a human right' - meaning?
IzzyS
Posts: 11,045 Forum Member
✭✭
I just came across a photo of a placard which reads 'love is a human right' and im curious as to what people think of this? I think its in relation to a gay pride march, so I presume its meant in terms of people being able to have relationships with people of their own gender without fearing punishment or whatever? presumably its not a case of if someone goes through life without falling in love, are they somehow being deprived of a human right? 
I know that probably sounds like a daft thing to say or ask but for some reason, when I read the sign it stuck me as a strange but interesting saying, so I wondered what people think about it?.
I know that probably sounds like a daft thing to say or ask but for some reason, when I read the sign it stuck me as a strange but interesting saying, so I wondered what people think about it?.
0
Comments
Be it parental love, filial love, sibling love, romantic love.
Love is a very human concept so I guess could be considered a human right?
Yes but there's obviously a difference between loving your friends and family and being in an intimate relationship with a partner. How could people be prevented from loving their friends and family?.
I did think that it was a bit of a strange statement, since human rights are usually somewhat more tangible, things like clean water and shelter etc.
Of course it wouldn't mean that, it just means that people should have the right to be in love, show this and celebrate it without any fear of punishment or inequality. That is one of our most basic rights really, marriage and so on.
I think you are taking the sign a little too literally, but the sentiment behind it is a true and obvious one.
I agree everyone should but with human rights, its usually a case of if you don't have them, then you should chase it legally, that you've been failed. If an employer is in breach of human rights, then they may be taken to court over it. How does that apply with something like love? if prisoners aren't allowed conjugal visits then could they argue that their not getting their human right to love, to be allowed to be with people in private and so on?.
Ok, that makes more sense - as long as people don't do anything obscene in public obviously. Its ironic though as I think I heard recently that fewer people are getting married nowadays. It honestly did strike me as a strange statement at first though.
Therefore, based on the previous assertion, "Paedophilia is a human right".
*Fetches popcorn*
Well, of course. I'm not quite sure what your point here is?
Any couple should have the right to love each other without being persecuted regardless of their sexual orientation.
But at the same time, people don't automatically have 'the right' to have a relationship with whoever they want, if the other person isn't interested.
I did think about putting 'with a person who is consenting and who is over the age of consent' in my earlier post but figured that was bloody obvious. I forgot I was on DS.
I wondered that too but didn't want to go there. I'd like to think its common sense that basic laws such as the age of consent should be respected(!).
Love is not a human right, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes no mention of it, although what the LGBT activists are getting at is the idea of equality that LGBT people should have the same rights as heterosexual people for love and relationships, not that everyone should be entitled to it (as the likes of Rodger thought).
That was one persons personal opinions (to put it one way), it does not automatically make it so.
If you remember this recent #scandal involving The Harpy, then it has already been asserted in such a way.
and saying an EMOTION is a "human right" is a joke!
I recently read someone stating that everyone should have the right to a "healthy sex life." The complications of declaring that a right seem to have not been fully comprehended by the person.
This^
If we're being literal, "philos" actually means "brotherly/non-sexual" love. (That's why "pederast" makes more sense for nonces, "eros" means "erotic/sexual" love). It's not really a word whose roots work literally anymore, although it has a definition as an entire word, and one which has precious little to do with love.
Thats how I would take it, noone should deny love between people on the basis that they themselves do not like it ( other than if it was illegal for a good reason of course)
I mean the other option is that it is a human right that we are all loved and then I am sure some bright spark would try and sue someone if they weren't
This happens in many countries therefore if you try and prevent someone from loving someone else then you are denying them a human right.
I suppose no one can prevent you from loving who you want, but they can make it difficult to express it.