Takes to the sky like a bird in flight… Are ‘religious’ and ‘human’ rights in conflict?

Inalienable human rights are the phlogiston of political science.  Sensible people who reject all kinds of superstition, pseudo-science, and quackery happily jump on board the rights train.  Libertarians are the worst at it, to be frank.  They will look at you with a straight face while they deny every conception of community that isn’t ontologically grounded in individuals (lulz) and then will happily assert that individuals have rights that exist prior to the formation of the State and which must, as a matter of fact, be respected.


There are plenty of psychological experiments where you give people contradictory stimuli (usually visual and sensual) and then watch them squirm as their brains try to rationalise what’s going on.  Here’s one with visual and sound stimuli (the McGurk effect).

It’s rare that you see somebody caught in one of these conflicts as a result of their political philosophy but, when you do, it is a delight.  On The Guardian, Deborah Orr finds herself stuck in a bizarre conflict between ‘human’ rights and ‘religious’ rights.

Continue reading “Takes to the sky like a bird in flight… Are ‘religious’ and ‘human’ rights in conflict?”