When the death penalty is a tradition in a country, why should it change? What right do others, from wealthy countries, have to criticise national traditions and impose their own values?
All countries have their own cultures and traditions, and the death penalty was at one time practiced in most countries of the world. Human rights, however, are universal and inalienable, deriving from aspirations agreed by all societies – aspirations such as human dignity and the sanctity of human life.
All too often the cultural or national traditions argument is invoked by authoritarian regimes to justify their own positions and has nothing to do with cultural diversity or the traditions of a particular people.
The so-called wealthy countries are not a uniform group. Their traditions vary widely and have led to considerable differences in the speed with which human rights standards have been achieved. For instance, although it had abolished the death penalty de facto for decades, the United Kingdom ratified Protocol No. 6 in 1999, later than numerous other Council of Europe States, among them Moldova, Georgia, Portugal and Iceland. Those countries that have abolished the death penalty have adapted their practices to international standards, and there is no reason any country in which humans live should not apply these standards. All humans are equally worthy – no matter where they live.
- frankLv 41 0 年前最佳解答
2007-03-12 22:58:03 補充：
ps: 我盡力了，但我不確定怎麼翻 aspiration 較恰當