Every person has a human right to food and the government has a duty

[pnwmom]

to ensure this right. And securing this right isn't a matter of charity; it's a matter of justice.

"Sr. Francine Dempsey is a member of the justice committee of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, Albany, N.Y., and a member of the Hunger Action Network of New York State."

http://ncronline.org/news/peace-justice/every-person-has-human-right-food

America needs a comprehensive national strategy to end hunger, a strategy based on the fundamental human right to food.

In 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt proclaimed in his State of the Union address on the "Four Freedoms" that Freedom from Want is an "essential human right." The U.N. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights says that the human right to food is fulfilled "when every man, woman and child, alone and in community with others, has physical and economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its procurement." The United Nations also states that the right to food creates a legal obligation that requires governments to "pro-actively engage in activities intended to strengthen people's access to and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood, including food security."

"Nourishing Change: Fulfilling the Right to Food in the United States," a report released in May by the International Human Rights Clinic at New York University School of Law, says that the "right to food recognizes individuals as rights holders, not simply recipients of government or private assistance." As a result, "governments are duty bearers that have a responsibility to ensure that the right to food is progressively realized for all individuals under their jurisdiction."

Food is a human right because food is essential to life. The government has a duty to ensure people's right to food.

Today, most people view charity, not justice, as the rationale for government programs and nonprofit efforts assisting America's food-insecure individuals and households. Even as these acts of charity go forward, the problem they are meant to solve grows more severe. According to "Nourishing Change," 20 million more people participated in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, in 2012 than in 2007, for a total of 46 million people, and since 2007, the number of persons receiving emergency food assistance has risen 60 percent. Still, in these times of recession, politicians and others in the public sphere argue for cuts in food assistance programs, as though the failure of these programs is the fault of the people suffering food insecurity, rather than the fault of a system that is based on neither the human right to food nor a comprehensive national strategy to end hunger.

[demosincebirth]

1. Also healthcare. I beleive HC is a human right.

[pnwmom]

2. I agree. And so do the nuns, who were solidly behind the ACA,

and would have been equally supportive of Medicare for all.

[Cha]

3. thanks pnwmom.. I should hope so!

[pnwmom]

4. She's throwing down the gauntlet at Paul Ryan fake-Catholics. n/t

[defacto7]

5. I totally agree.

There is too much us vs. them in government. We are the government and we want to feed ourselves and it is our right to instruct the leaders of our government to take care of it's citizens. It is not the will of the people to starve or be starved. It may be the wish of a few in control to force servitude on it's citizens but they are not the majority nor are they our lords and therefore do not have the right to deny the basic needs of humankind. On the contrary, we have the obligation as a nation to feed and provide health care to our citizens without question.

[Laelth]

10. +1. n/t

-Laelth

[blkmusclmachine]

6. ,

,

[Spitfire of ATJ]

7. Meanwhile, you hear SOME PEOPLE gripe about "moochers" or the latest: "useless eaters".

[iamthebandfanman]

8. nutrition, health, shelter, and education

should all be free in a civilized forward moving society.

energy should also be nationalized, as its a matter of national security and public welfare as it has an effect on the economy..

but that's just me.

[pnwmom]

9. Don't forget water. There are corporations trying to privatize water. nt

[mynaturalrights]

11. I had never heard that but I know in some states

it's illegal to catch rain water on your property.

[pnwmom]

12. Welcome to DU, mynaturalrights.

Quotes from the Nestle CEO

http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/nestl-ceo-doesnt-think-water-basic-ri

It’s a question of whether we should privatize the normal water supply for the population. And there are two different opinions on the matter. The one opinion, which I think is extreme, is represented by the NGOs, who bang on about declaring water a public right. That means that as a human being you should have a right to water. That’s an extreme solution. And the other view says that water is a foodstuff, like any other, and like any other foodstuff it should have a market value. Personally, I believe it’s better to give foodstuff a value so that we’re all aware that it has its price and then that one should take specific measures for the part of the population that has no access to this water, and there are many different possibilities there.

I’m still of the opinion that the biggest social responsibility of any CEO is to maintain and ensure the successful and profitable future of his enterprise. For only if we can ensure our continued, long-term existence will we be in the position to actively participate in the solution of the problems that exist in the world. We’re in the position of being able to create jobs: 275,000 here, 1.2 million who are directly dependent on us in principle. That makes 4.5 million worldwide, because behind each of our employees are another three people, so we have at least 4.5 million people who are directly dependent on us.

If you want to create work, you have to work yourself, not as it was in the past where existing work was distributed. If you remember the main argument for the 35-hour week was that there was a certain amount of work and it would be better if we worked less and distributed the work amongst more people. That has proved quite clearly to be wrong. If you want to create more work you have to work more yourself. And with that we’ve got to create a positive image of the world for people and I see absolutely no reason why we shouldn’t be positive about the future. We’ve never had it so good; we’ve never had so much money, we’ve never been so healthy, we’ve never lived as long as we do today. We have everything we want and still we go around as if we were in mourning for something.

SNIP

[LWolf]

13. Agreed. nt