International Convention on Human Rights (ICHR)

It is noteworthy that one of these comments comes from Europe and the other from America. Both seem to indicate the expansion of human rights into regional instruments is a threat to domestic rights. Two points in response. First, the expansion of rights does not denigrate existing ones. Think of it like a candle in a room. If I have a candle and I light yours, mine does not give off less light. If Mr. O'Reiley is proud of rights that Americans, and many others, have fought for, then he should also be proud that these rights, like many good ideas, are now circling the globe.

Two, whether it is Europe, or the US, the expansion into regional instruments, particularly economic and social rights rights is in accordance with Article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – regional documents are one prospect to meet the duty to make the rights in the UDHR “fully realized.”

Get real people - can't anyone remember why this country was founded? Men and Women have die for your rights and you piss on them with this crap! You should all be a shamed or your shelfs!

Can't you see from the recent Irish vote that we don't need any more regional human rights documents? Nations can do just fine by themselves, thank you.

The question who makes health care decisions is a good one. the answer is in some instances courts, but in most instances the legislature. One of the main concerns about the recognition of economic and social rights that are enforceable in courts of law is that the courts do not become super legislatures and have to decide questions such as what type of medical procedure is allowed. If there is a situation where there is no medical procedure at all and the legislature has not addressed the matter, then the court could order the legislature to create such procedures. In an emergency, the court may even order the procedure to be done. But typically, it would be left to the legislature to define the extent of the medical procedures that a person is entitled to. Unlike free speech or freedom of religion, where the Court solely determines the extent of the right without deference to the legislature, when it comes to health care, the court should be more deferential to the social and economic decisions made by legislatures. Still, in no instance should a person be left without any health care at all.

If you have universal healthcare, who is going to decide what home health care procedures are allowed in what are not? to have to be limits.