Human Rights concepts Faith and Religion have the potential to generate conflict between each other as schools of thought or world views. Human Rights concepts pre-suppose inalienability of the espoused rights. In other words individuals are said to be born with non-negotiable ownership of certain rights to access goods, relationships and services that enhance their well-being. Hence, for example, it is not a priviledge to have food, no other person has the authority to control access to nutrition in so much as this food is legally obtained. However, power can be used to curtail this access. This is then considered to be a violation of the the right to food. In most religions, all goods and services are considered a priviledge provided by a benevolent higher Spiritually omnipotent  power. Faith placed in this Deity is therefore often a response to the benevolence of the Deity. There is relationship and divine community involving both the deity and fellow human persons. The norms practiced in this communtiy are religion and the spiritual acceptance of the deity and trust in his divine benevolence and goodwill are faith. Hence, with silence on the divine source of benevolence and rights we get the ideals of human rights teaching. With inclusion of the divine responsibility for benevolence and faith we get religion with faith.

Child Rights are the child-specific human rights that are also inalienable to the child and not priviledges to be doled out by benevolent adults. However, since the child is necessarily the ward of one or other adult, it often happens that adults feel the right to control the availability of said rights to the child. Additionally, religion has prescriptions and proscriptions unique to the child. It is necessary for the survival of a religion that children are taught the requisite tenets and practice of guardian's faith.  Due to the fact that Human rights are considered to be inalienable to the child, it is often the case that children are taught about these rights directly. Often this appears to be an equalisation of adult to child in ways that begin to be seen as an affront to religion and faith. Hence, there is quite a repulsion against both the proponents and teachings of child rights. Children's rights as all human rights are often percieved as instruments of cultural-religious destruction by western humanists. It is true that some such abuse has occurred, it would be unfair and naive to deny this.

However, it would equally be wrong to believe that Human Rights teaching is somehow the "new atheism". In fact close and serious study of human rights concepts will reveal that these rights are already part of every single religion's teachings.  The right to life, for instance,  may be put forward as the the Biblical commandment "Thou shalt not kill...", and mean exactly the same thing. Since no human being is considered to be God's counsellor in matters of earthly governance, it follows that human relationships must start from the stand point of equality of form and substance between all human persons. All are therefore born equal, and if so, all possess the same rights to life, liberty and human progression. Cancelling God from the equation of human relations does not therefore become a pre-requisite for espousal of human rights concepts. Rather this would be an unfair demand to place on any human being-exactly for the fact that human beings have the right to faith and belief, normally termed the "The Right to Worship."

The Human Rights Charter can be quite correctly summed as human love in practice in the context of the right to human free-will; with silence on the divine or non-divine source of the rights being respected in this love activity. In religion there is love for fellow humans acted out in respect for mutual God-given benefits of life for all, with the additional and necessary  faith and love for the deity Nevertheless, God holds no person in "Concentration Camp Earth". Rather, He has given Himself limits of interference so as to allow each person to exercise their rights without undue influence. In Christian teaching for example, God can only be invited into a relationship. He will never violate the person's right to free choice, association, assembly, belief and de-bars anybody  else from doing so. Hence, human beings are left free to act out or not to act out their human love. Consequences for both positions are spelt out but there is no compulsion.

It  therefore  becomes the summary of all  law and prophetic teaching to love others as one loves oneself and to thus do to others as one would expect others do to oneself. In short, love is the full unconditional respect for the full rights of others. This love is also extended to God. This is what sums up all religion in the Christian faith. Few other faiths would hold a contrary positions as far as human relations are concerned. In view of all this, is it then right to love children less than adults, just because God put them under one's care? Do children cease to be human under the banner of religion? Is it not in fact the most sensible thing to do to protect the rights of those to whom the faith's future belongs? There is therefore no contradiciton between faith and Children's Rights. There is, on the contrary, a collaboration and re-affirmation of one by the other in either direction of consideration.