Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: almost wholly ineffectual7% picked this

   The human rights language contained in Article 1 of the UN Charter is so ambiguous as to

   This is way too condemnatory. The author is largely praiseworthy of this document. The author will agree to some minor disappointments, but this answer makes it seem like the document is fatally flawed and almost worthless. The author also never stresses "ambiguous language" in that final paragraph.

   7%
2. B

   Opposite3% picked this

   The weaknesses of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights generally outweigh the strengths

   The author would say that the strengths outweigh the weaknesses. You can judge the main impression someone wants to give you by judging the idea they leave you with. People who teach Critical Race Theory: Although America's race relations have greatly improved, racism is still a problem. People who oppose Critical Race Theory: Although racism is still a problem, America's race relations have greatly improved. This author starts the 4th paragraph with her resignation that this document had no punch behind it because it was non-binding. But then she pivots with "Nevertheless" back to positive and leaves us with that taste in our mouth: clearly deserves recognition as a standard-setting piece of work

   3%
3. C

   Opposite1% picked this

   It was relatively easy for the drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to reach a consensus concerning

   The 2nd paragraph suggests that it was very difficult to reach a consensus: - an elaborate 8-stage drafting process - went through almost every level of the UN hierarchy - the articles were debated at each stage

   1%
4. D

   Out of Scope: omitted rights4% picked this

   The drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights omitted important rights that should be included in a truly comprehensive

   At no point in the passage does the author bring up any specific rights that the UDHR omitted to include. The author's only qualm was that the document didn't have any binding legal enforcement to give it teeth.

   4%
5. E

   Correct84% picked this

   The Universal Declaration of Human Rights would be truer to the intentions of its staunchest proponents if UN member countries were required by

   Why this is right

   Appealingly, this answer reinforces something from the last paragraph: - it's progressive, but has weaknesses, mainly the fact that its non-binding (it suggests how countries should act but countries aren't forced to abide by it) - it facilitated later stuff that is binding - it should be commended for setting an international standard or protected rights all nations should aspire to have What do we mean by "its staunchest (most passionate) proponents"? The end of the 1st paragraph talks about a group who thought that Article 1 of the UN Charter "didn't go far enough to guarantee basic human rights. This group lobbied vigorously" for the human rights provisions to be something that member states would be required to act on. The decision to commission the UDHR was borne out of that desire to make the human rights provisions of the 1945 UN Charter into something binding, something that its member states would have to follow. The author likes this document, but is disappointed that it doesn't have legally binding status. She knows that this document was created because some staunch defenders of human rights were mad that the old Charter didn't have binding human rights provisions. So it would be truer to those people's goals / desires if this UDHR had binding legal status.

   Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   84%