Human Rights Day is coming in just a couple days. The day commemorates the proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948. The Declaration was written partially as a response to the atrocities of genocide and war that took place during the Second World War. I think it stands as an amazing testament to the best of human intentions. We are all born free and equal. But this is not yet realized in the current state of world affairs.

Take a moment and read the Universal Declaration. Find a way to mark Human Rights Day in action, not just in thought. Because ‘recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’

While searching for updates on the Iraqi election law, I came across a tool that I think is worth sharing: Election Guide. Check this thing out. It’s a search tool for election information, covers 1998 to 2014, has descriptions of electoral systems, results breakdowns, a news search feature, and will even let you sign up for automatic updates.

I happened upon this through a simple google search, so I haven’t gotten to kick its tires very hard. I/we would love to know of any other tools like this. Do you use anything similar to this election tool?

The Iraqi parliament did indeed pass a new election law.

Here’s an Al-Jazeera panel interview addressing issues for the upcoming elections: “Inside Story, with presenter Imran Garda, discusses with guests Saad al-Mutalibi, a political adviser at the ministry of dialogue and the head of the government’s reconciliation team, Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of the Iraqi parliament, and Kenneth Katzman, a specialist in Gulf affairs for the Congressional Research Service.”

It’s fascinating in its breadth.

I nearly missed something very interesting while scanning a New York Times editorial by Thomas Friedman: he quotes Iraqi prime minister Nuri Maliki on human rights…

Friedman argues that an open election in Iraq has a greater chance of producing regional change than the Afghan elections, and his perspective encompasses the recent Iranian elections, too.

What human rights document do you consider most important?

My own beliefs about human rights are shaped about equally by a bunch of gut reactions and some very abstract ideas. When something seems particularly just or unjust, I’m usually reacting at the level of “That’s right!” or “That’s wrong!”

Like I said before, I read to find out what I think. So I’m asking today about documents, because that’s where I begin to bridge the gap between my own reactions and abstractions. I think first of the Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the philosophical debates that are context for these documents. I imagine some think first of the golden rule or religious scripture like the Koran, the Bible, the Torah. Maybe some think of the writings of Rousseau or Locke and philosophy concerning divine, legal, and natural rights.

Go back and look at that interview with Galbraith and Mulet. Notice that neither of them refers directly to any document, but a great deal is implied. Their disagreement is largely procedural and political, but the subtext is a very complex ground of different religious, ethnic, and legal distinctions. Building and supporting a workable human rights framework requires both agreement and disagreement. It’s often messy.

When you find yourself facing a difference between what you think is right and what a neighbor thinks, how do you bridge that gap? How about when that neighbor isn’t so near but is halfway round the world?

Do you react? Do you start to think about the abstractions behind their rights and yours? Does a particular document shape your thoughts and feelings in these sorts of moments? Which ones?

Here’s an interview by PBS Newshour’s Margaret Warner in which she explores multiple allegations concerning election fraud in the recent Afghan elections. It’s an excellent interview, and I think it illustrates what makes me crazy about this issue. Her subjects are Peter Galbraith–former US Ambassador to Croatia and recently-fired head of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA)– and Assistant Secretary General Edmond Mulet. Galbraith has very publicly accused U.N. Special Representative Kai Eide of mishandling efforts to prevent election fraud and helping cover it up after the fact. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon fired Galbraith, claiming this was due to a personality clash between Galbraith and Eide.

The New York Times reports on the issue here.The Newshour’s interview transcript is here.

I am stupefied when I try to follow the politics surrounding election fraud. Shouldn’t an election boil down to some simple logic and counting? I know this is a drastic and naive over-simplification, but how can free elections happen when an assistant secretary general of the UN is hiding behind political sophistry?

We constantly have news of war and conflict, detentions and renditions, and all of that takes place in very high-flown language of law and international politics. My daily path to work takes me past a spot where homeless folks line up and wait for different churches and civic groups who bring meals there, and I cannot help but feel sympathy and a lot of uncertainty about the experiences that brought them to that same location in such different circumstances as me.

Do you think about rights when you read the Sunday paper? Maybe it’s through discussion with a friend or a random acquaintance? Is it while you’re waiting for the bus or stuck in traffic? At a coffee shop, bar, church, synagogue, mosque, the local swimming pool?

What makes you think about rights? Put another way, what makes rights relevant to you?

I read to find out what I think.  Since you’re here, reading, I know many of you do the same.

You’re reading a blog about human rights, so I also know you think a bit about human rights.  We intend this blog to be a place where people can speak up and participate in engaging discussion.  This given, I would like to start a bit of a discussion here…

What is the first right you think of?  Why do you think that is?

I was raised to expect certain rights. I also know many of us were raised to expect particularly different ones. We all know of rights being protected or limited because of all sorts of things, and we each have faced very different circumstances- ranging from war, to immigration, to just being raised in the same place as our grandparents. I don’t think it’s too strong for me to predict that we will be talking about different expected rights because of these different circumstances.

Let me give an example of what I have in mind.  For me, the right to vote first pops up.  On one hand, I think it’s because I live in the United States and voting is so central to this society. On the other hand, I know it’s because I do not face any immediate challenge to my rights–nothing threatens my life; I am free to move among society; I am free to speak as I see fit.

So, what right is the first to come to your mind?  Why?