Human rights are Relative

What is regarded as a legitimate right or not a legitimate right is relative in this world. This is the standard of the world - rights are relative. Most accept rights to be how they themselves see it and not accordingly to a set of universal objective standards. This accounts for the increasing tension between different groups over rights are people entitled to.

Human rights are rights according to how humans see their rights and therefore, are typically focused on self-interest rather than caring or understanding others. This is the core of most of the 21st century campaigns. Many 21st century human rights activists point the finger at groups which insist that rights are derived from objective and universal moral standards for being against human rights. The term 'human rights' is the perhaps the most spoken about, and most emotionally charged issue in the modern world.

The West has criticised non-Western nations like China and Russia for lack of human rights defined according to Western values. It had criticised China for taking away the rights of the people to vote and Russia for its laws regarding homosexual propaganda. It has criticised India for female genital mutilation and the Middle East for restricting the way women dress. However, just like how one can criticise others for disrespecting human rights according to one's own standards, others can do the same in return. What is perceived as a right is based on the cultural and religious values one has. Rights are no simple issues.

It seems that the West, in criticising other countries for not respecting human rights can be in turn be seen to be guilty for some of its practices. Asian, African and Middle Eastern countries may criticise the West for its usury and sexual ethics from their perspectives. However, they don't because they do not see how their culture is superior over others.