The Pros And Cons Of Fighting For Human Rights

987 Words 4 Pages
The topic of Human Rights has been debated for centuries. From Ancient times to present day, countries and nations have fought for power and freedom against one another. In recent decades many rights activists have presented themselves from Women’s Rights Activists to Human Rights Activists in general. The question has been posed: Are humans good at fighting for the rights of others? The answer is controversial, but such evidence as the activists who were affected by the neglection of Human Rights have made it clear that people are only good at fighting for the rights of others because their own rights have been vulnerable.

People whose rights have been denied often do not readily act against their oppressors. Night, by Elie Wiesel, provides
…show more content…
Such as the case regarding David Cash. Cash's case was widely disputed in the late 90's over what was moral and what was legal. Cash witnessed his friend restrain a seven-year-old girl and walked away without attempting to stop or report the incident. Once he was informed of what his friend had done, he still chose not to come forward with the information. According to the article, Shunning and Shaming, Cash insists, "The simple fact remains that I do not know this little girl [just as] I do not know starving children in Panama." Cash disregarded Sherrice Iverson's rights as he walked out of that bathroom and left her to his friend who assaulted and murdered her. After the fact he maintained that he was innocent even against public opinion. He disregarded her rights as he did not attempt to protect her or come forward with information regarding her case. The reason many Human Rights crimes get committed is due to people such as David Cash who refuse to intervene. Despite these facts, it is possible for people to be good at fighting for the rights of others. For instance, Sherrice Iverson's mother became an advocate for her daughter and because of her support, a new law was put into motion. This case has "...sparked a movement in both California and Nevada to pass something called "Sherrice's law" to require witnesses to intervene and report cases of sexual assault against children" (Booth). Iverson's mother probably would have never become an advocate for such laws to be passed. Because her daughter was murdered and the one person who could have stopped it wasn't prosecuted, she became an advocate for her daughter and all those who have had their rights stripped away because a bystander was not required to testify to their case. She and other people who participated in this rally succeeded in having the bill become a

Related Documents