| This dissertation explores the complexities and possibilities of eliciting consensus about moral norms—particularly those that affect women—across cultures. Specifically, it is an ethical analysis of human rights rhetoric as a possible method of speaking about moral norms across religious and cultural gulfs in our diverse world. Its point of departure is the unequal situation of women worldwide, and the prevalent exclusion of women from basic material and social goods. I approach the project from a feminist perspective. Of special concern are the ways in which the Catholic social tradition, revised in light of feminist concerns, can contribute to a conception of rights that is culturally sensitive and that includes women as full participants in the common good.; In the tradition of Catholic social teaching, I propose a rights language which is non-sectarian, with disclosive power in the international political arena. It takes into account criticisms (of Western, liberal rights language) from Marxism, liberation theology, anti-colonialism, the Catholic Church, postmodernism and feminism. I argue that if rights rhetoric is to be successful in the international arena, the key is threefold: (1) an accurate anthropology must stand behind the use of rights language, (2) persons who traditionally have been voiceless in the development of norms must participate in determining what constitutes rights, and (3) some diversity must be allowed in the implementation of universal human rights in differing cultural contexts. I look particularly to Catholic social teaching as well as the work of Edward Schillebeeckx and Martha Nussbaum as models for a feasible, inductive approach to human rights grounded in an accurate anthropology.; Throughout, I emphasize that rights rhetoric must be met by local practices and institutions, which it both criticizes and builds on. Development efforts are essential to making rights language effective in the lives of women worldwide, as illustrated by two case studies. |
