Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

The Human Rights Act- who wants this? Who benefits? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    When I hear about rage of majority Tory scum flooding the commons because we're suddenly going to have no rights, I ask myself, how did the Conservatives manage to dupe so many voters? What do these enlightened few know that they don't?

    Well, let's read this: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/y...man-rights-act

    We've never been much of a socialist central state, at least to the extent of all the other European nations (is that an oxymoron yet?) but having just read up on this, it's really taking the biscuit.

    The leftist war cry around defending "rights" that are written on paper that can be overridden in an instant:
    "most human rights are not absolute. Some of these rights can be limited in certain circumstances, as set out in the specified Article of the European Convention on Human Rights. For example, your right to liberty can be limited only in specified circumstances such as if you are convicted and sentenced to a prison term. Other rights can only be restricted when certain general conditions are met, for example where this is necessary to protect the rights of others or in the interests of the wider community. For example, the government may be able to restrict your right to freedom of expression if you are encouraging racial hatred."

    When you start offering positive rights to all individuals, how do you apply them? How can you enforce the right that nobody die or have their life shortened in any way? It must be damned intrusive whichever way you choose. The truth is, nobody deserves to live- you create your own worth, along with those who raised you.

    So apparently we have a freedom of expression written in law: but no. It's only free expression when it does not inconvenience the political consensus. Legal action may be taken against those who speak out against the government, all they have to do is claim you are inciting violence.

    Hell, there's even a "right to marry". I'm glad they introduced that right, because the traditional family has been in ruins for years. Maybe now it will patch itself up with this legislat-- oh wait, marriages have never been so low.

    Tell me again why this legislation is needed to enforce rights that aren't enforced absolutely. Explain why this angers you. They use words like "freedoms" and "rights", but they have no idea what these mean. There is no liberty in this document whatsoever: these are positive rights, not negative ones. Where is the "freedom to be left alone" right? Why do immigrants straight off the boat get the same rights as a legal citizen?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    When you start offering positive rights to all individuals, how do you apply them? How can you enforce the right that nobody die or have their life shortened in any way? It must be damned intrusive whichever way you choose. The truth is, nobody deserves to live- you create your own worth, along with those who raised you.
    It's generally interpreted in that a State should not make a deliberate attempt to end someone's life, whether it be by direct malice/neglect, or the death penalty.

    So apparently we have a freedom of expression written in law: but no. It's only free expression when it does not inconvenience the political consensus. Legal action may be taken against those who speak out against the government, all they have to do is claim you are inciting violence.
    And a government without evidence for said violence would lose the case, you'd go free, and their credibility would fail. So that's a non-starter.

    Hell, there's even a "right to marry". I'm glad they introduced that right, because the traditional family has been in ruins for years. Maybe now it will patch itself up with this legislat-- oh wait, marriages have never been so low.
    It's not about encouraging or discouraging marriages but recognising that if two consenting adults want to marry, the State has no business stopping them.

    Tell me again why this legislation is needed to enforce rights that aren't enforced absolutely. Explain why this angers you. They use words like "freedoms" and "rights", but they have no idea what these mean. There is no liberty in this document whatsoever: these are positive rights, not negative ones. Where is the "freedom to be left alone" right? Why do immigrants straight off the boat get the same rights as a legal citizen?
    Personally, I don't think removing the HRA would impact us much, as those rights existed before. It is reassuring having them in one place, though.

    What's more, the HRA domesticates the Convention on Human Rights, meaning almost all appeals can stop in the UK courts system, making it on the whole a lot cheaper.

    However the more important thing to consider is the impact the UK's adherence to the Convention and its HRA has one other countries. In the Council of Europe, Russia, for example, is under regular pressure and embarassment about its treatment of political prisoners, homosexuals, minorities and others, as direct violations of a Convention is has signed up to. It tends to be on a constant backfoot about it. Such pressure would be drastically undermined if the UK started saying the Convention doesn't apply to it. Undoing the HRA could risk harming our 'soft' power and give tyrannies a feeling of license to reinterpret the Convention as they see fit.

    Basically, going through the effort of removing the HRA wouldn't benefit us much and could harm our international standing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    When I see "Equal Rights" I see Marxism. This is not a legit document for this country and does not benefit us that people who speak the truth about topics such as race and equality, etc. are incarcerated. There's no reassurance having them written down because ideas are in peoples' heads: if you stop teaching the idea the words will cease to have an effect. Take the second and first amendment in the US. The constitution is being *******ised all the time, so why do these human "rights" give you any security when written down?

    You have to earn your rights. You have to learn them and pass them down to your children. Not write them down and forget them. This document is worthless.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.