Backwards, and in heels!

One of the biggest arguments throughout the history of any sort of rights would be that of who gets to enjoy the stated rights.  Back in the French Revolution, they argued over whether all men should enjoy rights, no matter what their wealth or status; they argued over whether those following a separate faith should obtain the same rights, or whether freemen and Blacks should enjoy rights, and then on top of that, they never even thought a woman could possibly merit rights.  The same arguments employed against religious minorities, non-whites, and women can still be seen today, though the context or reason may be different.  

Take, for instance, the right to marry.  Arguments against allowing marriages are that only those of a certain sexuality, race, age and sometimes religion can enjoy marriage.  Within the last millennium, many changes have been made as to who is and who isn’t allowed to marry, and what marriage entails.  The “appropriate” age to marry went up as our life spans increased.  The social stigma of an unmarried woman lessened, and women could wait longer and longer before they were considered old maids, no longer handed off in marriage at the first opportunity that would suit the family.  The whole lead up to marriage changed, and we went from drawn up agreements with a bride’s price and dowry to sometimes eloping in Vegas after one too many cocktails.  People of a different race couldn’t marry each other for the longest time, and those who could “pass” as their partner’s race would in order to marry.  Many faiths would only accept marriages of those who shared the same beliefs, and that is still sometimes an issue today.  At a Catholic church, for instance, they will only preform the marriage if both parties have been baptised, performed their first communions, and completed their conformations, and if either does not have the documentation, the Church will not marry you.  Arguably, the most heated topic of current marriage debate is whether same sex couple have the right to marry, and, again, many of the same arguments are made against gay marriage that have been made against granting rights to other socially disadvantaged minorities.  

Here we are, a few centuries later, still arguing over who gets to enjoy which rights.  And, if things continue on this vein, which is likely due to “human nature”, we will continue to find new ways to argue over who gets to enjoy “Human Rights,” how many, and which ones.