In the Independent (UK), Johann Hari asks the question: Why Should I Respect Oppressive Religions? un declaration You know he’s on to a hop topic because the comments section is 10 pages long! In the article, he lays out a distinction between the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights that emphasizes the preservation of freedom for the individual and the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights, a document that subsumes or contextualizes (you pick your favorite term) freedom to the dictates of shar#ah law. Hari quotes a key passage from the Islamic declaration:

the limits set by the shar#ah [law]. It is not permitted to spread falsehood or disseminate that which involves encouraging abomination or forsaking the Islamic community.

The question I pose to my students and others is whether and/or how the Islamic declaration is “wrong”? The philosopher Alasdair McIntyre claims that liberalism is unable to provide us with a working morality because there is no agreed upon definition of justice. In modernity there exists a protection of rights, but no framework for what should be done with those rights? We are left to ultimately seek out a framework on our own with differing levels of success. Why should the rights in the Universal Declaration be considered absolute? Do we have a ethical or moral imperative to enforce their universality? I encourage you to read the Hari article and reflect upon our obligations if we truly adhere to the UN declaration.