Controversial Topic Discussion

Yes. This is where I find myself to often part ways with many of my fellow atheists. The claim that many of them make, that human rights, and more generally ethics and morality, are relative and only supported by social agreement, just does not hold water. While it is true that specific moral questions (if we can go from human rights to the broader scope of morality) are often answered through the biased lens of the social zeitgeist, the broad categorical definitions of right and wrong seem to be innate. We, for instance, never use the word right to express the same concept someone else attempts to express by using the word wrong. We may disagree as to whether specific issues fall into one of these two categories, but the categories themselves are never confused.

The human rights concept stems from our physical brains neuronal wiring, emerging as an actual existent phenomenon with our social gathering. We have no problem with saying all people deserve the same rights as we know what rights we want and know others feel the same. It requires no justification to make such a statement. It is only when we exclude people from this, by saying group A members, or perhaps more accurately non-group B members, do not deserve the rights we deserve, that justification is required. This seems to me to show that what we consider human rights, moral understandings and ethical decision making are all based in our survival ended evolved physical make-up as social animals.

It is as Kenneth says "a deep down I just know feeling", but, I would add, one that I don't think is beyond the scope of scientific understanding. There is actually some fascinating work being done in the field of neuro-ethics/psychology/philosophy where senses of justice and fairplay can be seen in our primate relatives. It has been shown for some time now that other social species have species relative 'codes of ethics' as well.

I won't use the word faith as I don't think it is accurate in describing what it is we rely on. It actually seems to be innate 'understandings' or concepts that are based in our physical nature. I think this differs substantially from what we mean when we use the word faith. Faith is based in belief. How we are is simply how we are.