Bentham the founder of Utilitarianism calls Rights Nonsense on Stilts; however it is often the language we use in society to discuss our most difficult issues. In the Rights Theory there are both positive and negative rights. The application of these rights are something agreed upon differently based on one’s political perspective. Typically everyone believes in negative rights that is the right to be left alone. The positive rights the right to demand an action from another person is a bit more controversial. Below are images from social and political campaigns which use rights as their justification for their stances. The problem with using Rights as the means for ethical decision making is that one person can say I have a right to …. and the response can be No you don’t. From these two contradictory positions how do we move forward? This may be part of the reason we have been fighting the same battles for decades on many of the same issues. Below are opposing positions on an issue both using Rights Theory as its justification. Pick one or any other similar dispute which uses Rights Theory on both sides and do an analysis. Please note that this is NOT an opinion paper. I am looking for an analysis using the theories. This is a test of your ability to use the material but it is also a test not to get triggered into a heated opinion piece.
You can give me a concise introduction and conclusion but I also what three paragraphs of analysis. In your conclusion you can give me an opinion of which theory you think is most useful. This essay should be between 2pages double spaced 12 pt Times New Roman font with 1 inch margins.
When you do a Rights Theory analysis please use the the material from the textbook as your guide and not just my explanation above. Note that there are declarations of rights agreed upon by certain societies and there are also positive and negative rights. Use the Turnitin link below to submit the assignment.
Hi there! Click one of our representatives below and we will get back to you as soon as possible.