Talk:Freedom of religion: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter Jackson No edit summary |
imported>Peter Jackson mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The third sentence touches on, but does not develop, the question whether a human right can be absolute - a question that is also neglected in the [[Human rights]] article. It is argued [http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/how-do-human-rights-work/ here] and [http://www.bihr.org.uk/human-rights-in-action/chapter-3-different-rights-%E2%80%93-a-balancing-act here] that most are not, and it is argued [http://www.ourcivilisation.com/cooray/btof/chap225.htm here] that none are. It seems strange to ignore the well-documented debate on that issue. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 14:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC) | The third sentence touches on, but does not develop, the question whether a human right can be absolute - a question that is also neglected in the [[Human rights]] article. It is argued [http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/how-do-human-rights-work/ here] and [http://www.bihr.org.uk/human-rights-in-action/chapter-3-different-rights-%E2%80%93-a-balancing-act here] that most are not, and it is argued [http://www.ourcivilisation.com/cooray/btof/chap225.htm here] that none are. It seems strange to ignore the well-documented debate on that issue. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 14:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC) | ||
:Not sure what you mean here. The third sentence is the one quoting the UDHR. The article says no one would claim ''this'' right is absolute. The more general discussion belongs in the more | :Not sure what you mean here. The third sentence is the one quoting the UDHR. The article says no one would claim ''this'' right is absolute. The more general discussion belongs in the more general article. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 14:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 09:35, 30 July 2012
The third sentence touches on, but does not develop, the question whether a human right can be absolute - a question that is also neglected in the Human rights article. It is argued here and here that most are not, and it is argued here that none are. It seems strange to ignore the well-documented debate on that issue. Nick Gardner 14:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean here. The third sentence is the one quoting the UDHR. The article says no one would claim this right is absolute. The more general discussion belongs in the more general article. Peter Jackson 14:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC)