<h3>The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBDH) </h3><h3 />
The two cases are similar, according to The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBDH), they are however wrong towards people of another nationality, remembering that ethnic discrimination can lead to crime.
The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UDBDH), unanimously ratified by the 191 Member States of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 2005, recognized human rights as a reference universal minimum for bioethics. The Declaration's structural axes are justice, recognition of the dignity of the human person, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. By including social and environmental issues, it expanded the scope of bioethics and recovered the original meaning given by Potter to this new territory of knowledge, when, in 1970, he used the term to refer to the need for a field of knowledge that dealt with human survival, which was founded on an alliance between biological knowledge and ethical values.
<h3>Stigma, discrimination, identity, tolerance... The social context of bioethics</h3>
Article 11 of the DUBDH, when stating that discrimination and stigmatization constitute violations of human dignity, refers to the concept that stigma and human dignity are intrinsically associated; one exists only in the negation of the other. Stigma is only produced or materialized to the extent that their dignity is removed from the other, when the other is diminished in what constitutes him as a human being, when he is inferior and considered below other human beings.
With this, we can say that the answer to both cases would be to recriminate the author of racial slurs.
learn more brainly.com/question/3444313?referrer=searchResults
