A General Paper Essay Outline

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted

by members of the United Nations in 1948 to show their in-principle support for the preservation of the fundamental rights of people. However, because states are not bound to uphold the articles of the Declaration to their fullest extent, some of these rights have been curtailed to varying degrees, including the rights pertaining to matters of life and death. Governments do so by enacting laws, setting regulations or providing incentives that either directly or indirectly affect these matters such as anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia or prochoice legislation, population control policies and the death penalty. While governments could argue that they have just cause for their actions, the extent of their intervention should not lead to a complete usurpation of the individuals basic freedom.

 If the state were to be consistent with the

UN Declaration, then it should intervene insofar that its decisions reflect an impassioned pro-life position. Nobel Peace Laureate Sean Macbride said that by extending the understanding of the Declaration, then one could propose the right to refuse to kill as an article that would be compatible to the others

 States that oppose this might actually deem

this the soft approach that dulls their ability to use their full authority when they need it

 The argument above opens up a human

rights minefield because of the potential for the states abuse of power. How should the state draw the line ? Here is one possible answer : the state should preserve life, but in so doing, if it has to kill in order to save the lives of many, then it should go ahead and do so.

 On the other hand, one could

argue that there are other means that states should apply to approach the desired effect, without resorting to an encroachment of the rights of individuals

 The state has a duty to the people, but it

also cannot use this duty as a pretext to consciously limit the opportunity for life. While the state has to take care of the greater good, the state should also be held to a higher standard, beyond just the ability to control the masses and maintain order using Machiavellian means. I agree with state intervention as long as it is underpinned by the veneration of Life.