Wellman Chapter 4

Wellman's chapter 4 was especially interesting to me, because I have wondered throughout the course whether any of these rights could be deemed special or equal intermittently. As Thomas Hobbes states (77) maybe it is an innate human characteristic to be self interested. Therefore it would seem that all the rights being advocated for are special rather than equal, because they apply to a certain group, rather than universally.

It seems necessary to have to use the individualistic approach, because some members of the group may reject the right in the first place. For instance, women who do not plan on having children may not fight for the right for maternal leave, thus rejecting their claim on this “women’s right.” Women who do see the validity of such a right, take it upon their individualistic interest to promote such a right to exist. Essentially, rights can be perceived as individual or group-oriented dependent upon who is utilizing the right.

It’s also impossible for special rights to not be interrelated with equal rights. Affirmative action may seem like a special right claim for women and African American to men, but to the former it is a reparation right to make up for past injury. However, if the group or individual is not taking advantage of the right then for seems to be no way to make up for the injustices of the past. Also, are we going to be regretting any of these t in the future? There’s always the possibility that these reparations could harm a minority group in the future, something we would not be able to foresee until it is too late. Where is the morality of another group being discriminated against?

People say there is a proliferation of rights. I don’t see the expansion of rights coming to an end until the actual end of the world (if such ever occurs), because it seems someone will always be left out. Therefore the proliferation, whether it has moral basis, will most likely continue.