In my mind, you shant take someone's citizenship because they commit a crime. That is inhumane. Again, just personal moral views, but I find it immoral.
"All Men are create equal", is not followed with "until they commit a crime".
Please note you're quoting a man who owned more than 200 slaves, none of which he ever set free. But I guess we can let that slide since slaves were nothing more than property back then like horses or a Nintendo Wii. (so that makes me partially descended from some white dude's stuff!)
Just like morality, there really isn't nor can there ever truly be a standard, timeless definition of human rights because the concept of human rights has evolved through time based on changing societies, cultures and a particular societies' values and views on morality.
__________________________________________________
In just about every society, human rights and the extent to which they are allowed to be exercised must be governed. In the U.S*., even if someone has paid their debt, sacrificing all but their right to food, water, and life in prison, that doesn't mean they can just start on a clean slate, entitled to all of the rights they previously enjoyed, took advantage of, or had denied to someone else. Sometimes they[certain rights] must be taken away, restricted, or regulated to ensure the rights and freedoms of everyone else. Especially true in the case of certain criminals who have proven/demonstrated that they have no regard for the rights of others such as someones right to live.
Example:
According to some of the other members, our child rapist shouldn't be allowed to work in a day care center, but it can easily be argued that that would be in violation or restriction of one of their rights by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' definition.
Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
In order to keep the kids at the day care center or any other place where they congregate, our convicted felon is not to be allowed anywhere near them and a sign is put up notifying the residents of the town that he's there.
This further albeit indirectly violates more of his rights to work and liberty and probably a few others. In extreme cases, laws are passed in a particular town preventing the rapist from using public transport, going to the park, or working in certain establishments; how many of you would support similar restrictions to be put in place? thats just one example, but it happens all over, violations of human rights of a person to protect the population from further harm. We in this country and others I'm sure are willing to give up some of our own rights and freedoms in the name of safety. Look at airport security, the NSA nonsense, and there are most likely laws and regulations and things of the sort in your respective countries as well. Absolutely protecting every established human right at all costs for every moral or immoral person doesn't really work due to arguably and possibly ironically basic human nature itself.**
__________________________________________________
Different societies put different values on different rights invoked by different governments based on different histories and evolutions of their vastly different cultures.
Example 2:
In the same child rapist case, nobody asked about the conditions of the incident, whether it was a mental disorder, a fetish, or perhaps a situation where the child was dishonest in saying that they had fully consented to the intercourse, or even honest consent by a child with full and competent knowledge of what they were doing, but frowned upon so much by the parents and the community that they had the charges raised to invoke a harsher punishment (which would be violating the defendant's right to a fair and just trial). In most of our "civilized" western cultures, any reason to sexually or intimately contact a child is considered filthy, disgusting, perverted, and almost always associated with a mental sickness. There are however, cultures which consider a person to be an adult when they are sexually mature, meaning they're physically able to have intercourse and produce a healthy child. In that case, the criteria by which our man is judged has changed and the whole ordeal might be less of an issue if an issue at all depending on the circumstances.
__________________________________________________
To say we shouldn't have guns in our society that was created, protected, defended, defined, and preserved by them; a deeply symbolic and ingrained part of our culture, is almost offensive. No we don't have King George to fight off but even so, many of us have great deal of respect and pride because our nation tells us it's our RIGHT to bear arms in order to defend ourselves. The situation HAS changed, we no longer need to shoot at the limey Brits but we feel we need them(guns, not Brits) there to protect us from the random mugger, or the burglar or other wrongdoer that has entered our home, our castle, to take our possessions, do us harm, or otherwise threaten our supposed inalienable rights to life, or perhaps even liberty and the pursuit of happiness(sorry for the over-patriotism in that last part). For us, guns more or less fulfill every level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, our security and esteem, and help us defend and protect our physiological, loving(family, loved ones, etc) and even self actualization for some like in a recreational situation when you finally shoot all the clay pigeons, for example.
One of the BEST things about America
*** is that even though we're unified and equal, we're also separate and different. Other sates/counties/cities/local ordinances have their own ideas and societies within the the big American bubble and our government gives them the freedom to regulate many issues the way they please. We did have a point where the conflict was so great it split us in half for a time, but we've since then healed that wound. Now, if you don't like guns, move to a state that has them banned or heavily regulated. Hell, you can even go to Vermont where when last I checked, allowed their convicts to vote even while in prison! Our national/federal government usually does a pretty good job of stepping in and creating laws that protect our basic human rights across the country(imagine if the 15th and 19th amendments were left for the states to decide
). Other issues, e.g. gay marriage, guns, the death penalty, and marijuana use among others, in my eyes are things that the states should decide upon individually based on their own values. Cuz thats what we're all about here
****
*most of
** there are plenty such as right to food, land and education as well as other natural rights and such that I DO feel we should always strive to uphold, I'm not hating human rights please don't think I'm an immoral godless nazi. or an ultrarepublican
***and in some ways confusing, irrational, and outright bad things I'll amit
****My opinions on various issues are liable to change but even so, I'll (probably) always be proud to be an American! Now to jump back into my hyper-patriotic super-biased ultimate USA! internet character
note: yes I was bored. also there was alot of cutting and pasting and editing within this document so i may have missed some points and there might be a few big gaps int the logic or gramm or something because of it.