01 June 2006

Human rights for us, too

In the wake of the President’s declaration that he would put thousands of National Guardmen on our border with Mexico, we heard many people complaining of the possibility of human rights violations—by us, of course.

I have yet to hear anyone make the argument that our insistence on having our borders respected and enforced is a logical extension of our own human rights.

I wish to outline such a case here:

Article 13.1 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, gives to citizens of member states the “right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.”  Now, if I have this right then entailed in this right is the existence of a border, which itself also entails respect for the existence of this border, respect for this border, and enforcement of this border.

Article 15.1 provides that “Everyone has the right to a nationality.”  Without the insistence upon respect for a nation’s borders, this is an empty right; it provides for nothing.  A nation without enforcable borders?  If the U.S. ignored the border with Mexico, they would find themselves accused of human rights violations, no doubt.

Article 17 provides that (1) “Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others” and (2) “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.”  Now, in association with each other, we the people of the United States are the owners of this nation and its lands, public and private; according to 17.1, we have this right.   The people of Mexico also have the same right regarding their nation.  According to 17.2, we also have the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of our property.  When one’s neighbor ignores property lines, he effictively deprives one of his property.  The present behavior of the illegal aliens and the Mexican government, in encouraging and providing for illegal immigrants has the effect of depriving the people of the United States the enjoyment of their individual and aggregrate property rights.  Without the right to enfoce a border, this provision is also an empty right.

Article 20 provides that (1) “Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association” and (2) “No one may be compelled to belong to an association.”  Having freely assembled ourselves, we the people of the United States, through our elected government (cf. Article 21), have determined what shall be the qualifications for membership in our “association.”  The current behavior of illegal immigrants, ignoring our right to self-determination, constitutes a complusion to belong to an association not our choosing.

Article 28 provides that “Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.”

and

Article 30 provides that “Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.”

Our right to have our government enforce our borders is entailed by our own human rights.

So, how ‘bout it.  Can we please have our human rights?

Pretty please?

NOTE:  I am no fan of the United Nations.  It has been described as a protection racket for dictators.  As far as I’m concerned it’s real name ought to be The United-Against-The-U.S. Nations.

0 comments:

Search

Loading...

About Me

James Frank SolĂ­s
Former soldier (USA). Graduate-level educated. Married 22 years. Texas ex-patriate. Ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
View my complete profile

Blog Archive

Victory Caucus

The Victory Caucus

Capitalism

Christy Janssen Design

CJ Design