Post a response to one of the following questions:

• Hannum and Henkin give various definitions of human rights. What do you view as essential elements for something to be considered a human right?
• Louis Henkin writes: "The international expressions of rights themselves claim no philosophical foundation, nor do they reflect any clear philosophical assumptions; they articulate no particular moral principles or any single, comprehensive theory of the relation of the individual to society. That there are 'fundamental human rights' was a declared article of faith." Question: Does it matter that there is no agreed-upon basis for human rights? Would an underlying legal philosophy be important in understanding, practicing, and enforcing human rights law? Do you agree that there is no philosophical foundation for human rights law?
• From your review of the international treaties and declarations, what did you find to be some of the most striking differences among the documents?
• Should all or any part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights now be viewed as binding? Why?

Post a reply to the post of one other classmate (this reply should address the question you did not address in your primary post). See the Syllabus for due dates.