The assumption that we are all the same is not only simplistic, but is in contradiction with the very human evolution.
As we are not all the same, we are not all equal.
Both similarity and equality are neither natural, nor normal. They are human concepts in other words. Firstly we must accept that these concepts are not self-evident in order to lay claim on them. Because the paradox of human rights, is that they seem so normal, as if there were so by definition, and as a result, the society does not consider it necessary to protect them. As it's always the case however, the perception changes when it's facing basic existential problems.
As long as there is no war, oppression, violation, possession, destruction, everyone can believe what they want, but when the reality of the history of the nations touch him, then that belief collapses.
Human rights are not just a human creation, but also one of his greatest achievements. Precisely because they don't belong to nature.
Nature's own jurisprudence is much simpler, because it is merely a codification of an existing situation.
Whereas, the notion of human rights belongs to the human noosphere.They don't exist immediate within reality.
It is an implementation of ideas which exceeded the entity of nature.
For the human to conquer these ideas, thousands of years are needed, therefore we see, that even in ethics, which seem definitive to many, there exists an intertemporal dynamic. Because, even in this field, there is a difference between the recognition and the understanding of a phenomenon.
As for its solving and its explanation, they both belong to a later stage, which could be configured many times over, as it comes into conflict with reality.
If we protect human rights as theorems of a complex theory of morality, then we realize how difficult it would be for them to be understood as concepts to most.
Because they do not merely belong to a practical justice system, which we all know how it functions, with all the meanings of the word.
Morality is so general in human sciences, that many confuse it with religion itself.
Whereas, in some way, morality is the human element of religion.
And it's precisely its undefined placement in knowledge, which complicates the people so much.
We live through a period, at which everyone is trying to put aside the issue, "human rights", projecting the idea that, they constitute details which are connected to war procedures. But if that was an actual fact, then, there would be no such need.
On the contrary, human rights are bothersome, because they exist as an issue, wherever oppressed people exist. They can't put aside the actual essence of the human, not because it is not possible, but because it makes no sense.
In order to overcome this problem, the experts are not referring anymore to people but to lives, and by that they mean, lifeless bodies which don't even belong to reality, but to war statistics.