It disturbs the fundamentalist worldview that their vision has roots in the far past, but also provides a balanced perspective to the idea that such fundamentalist interpretations arise only from the religion's precepts itself and not from social pressures. This current ideologization of Islam has international roots, roots in colonialism, in the Marxist ideology of some of the post-colonial leaders, and also resistance to the state of Israel and the perceived domination of the world by the European powers Chapter 8 -- Human Rights, Human Dignity and Islam. An Exploration. From Islam: historical, social and political perspectives. Edited by Jacques Waardenberg. New York: de Gryter, 2002.

Although no state can be forced to sign the 1948 United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which specify a variety of basic human rights, from children's rights to the rights of workers, there is considerable political pressure for most nations that seek to be recognized as legitimate political entities to do so (163). However, although many Islamic countries seek national legitimacy, there is also often the tendency in the international community to perceive Islam as antithetical to human rights. Within the Islamic community of nations itself, there is also resistance to conforming to any internationally prescribed ideals for fear of Westernizing their principles of Islam. Some nations, such as Saudi Arabia, resisted the Declaration, stating that unlike the principles of God, the principles laid down by an international organization as a moral formula could not last for all time (167). Islamic nations also resisted declarations that threatened polygamy and the prescription against states forbidding individuals to change their religion (168). It should be noted, however, in the Quran, religion under compulsion is strictly...

Regardless, falling in line with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and a number of other Islamic states also showed resistance to the UN Declaration's guarantees of equality for women and other matters (169).
Islam was not the only religion whose leaders showed reluctance to endorse the doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church hesitated, perhaps fearing that some of the declarations might run against its social teachings, although the Jewish community was largely positive in its reception of the Universal Declaration, given the history of the Jewish people when they existed as a minority in many nations. Regardless, the Islamic Council of Europe did seek to delineate a list of human rights, not to rival those of Islam, but to provide political as well as religious guidelines for Islamic nations to protect human rights in keeping with the principles of Islam.

These rights, unlike the rights of the UN Declaration were not defined as essential to the human person but as rights bestowed by God that could be taken away by God. Moreover, the obligation to protect the rights of fellow was not because of the inalienable rights of all human beings, but a duty that human beings owed to God (174). This is keeping with the contractual relationship between human and God that can be traced back to the earliest days of the religion (176). This Declaration by the Islamic Council, like similar declarations of the Vatican, claimed to be both highly particular, in that it took an openly theological, in this case, Islamic view, of humanity, yet proclaimed its universality in terms of the principles it articulated. However, as problematic as the document may be, it is still worth remembering, given how human rights are violated in so many Muslim nations, that even Muslim nations themselves have collectively defined human rights…