The introduction of this article clearly states the events that have unfolded as a result of pluralism. It is very factual that regardless of the growing global transition characterized by dwindling geographical demarcation, the desire to cling on to cultural values remains engraved in people’s minds and hearts. This is because cultural identity and values form the basis of one’s being. China is an example of a group of people who have strongly embraced their cultural identity as opposed to the US that has adopted modern lifestyles. The existence of universal human rights does not necessarily mean that people’s cultural orientation will be overlooked. Culture is closely knit with religion and the development of universal human rights acknowledges these very crucial aspects. It is however true that the existence of universal human rights is compromised by cultural relativism. Human dignity and tolerance are not enough to support a global culture. Reinforcement of these rights is necessary. The Muslims for example have a culture that does not entirely factor in the issue of human dignity, and tolerance is not acceptable in their approval of ‘Holy War’. Whereas the Muslims deem the Holy War as a means to defend their religion, this is considered offensive to Christianity. Despite the disparities in culture, there are particular elements of the human race that are common and therefore, universal rights are not rendered entirely irrelevant in different cultures. In addition, it is wrong to assume that cultural relativism would interfere with the efficacy of these universal human rights. This is because each culture is governed by a strong set of values and norms that promote respect for the human race. In addition, the people who constructed the human rights owe part if not all, of their work to the norms and values gained from their cultural setting. Cultural relativism should be looked at as an opportunity to learn from others and embrace diversity. There is no way the world can talk of global transition without embracing diversity. The rule that the majority always win prevails in this context of international law. Therefore, no single state can raise its own “cultural norms and particularities above the international law and standards” (Ayton-Shenker 2). This is because the universal human rights are usually developed by people with different cultures and therefore what is deliberated is favourable to the human race in general. Crime against humanity like terrorism is not acceptable from an international perspective regardless of its cultural root. This is the reason why key figures like Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden were executed. Irrespective of one’s culture, everyone is obliged to ensure that universal human rights are adhered to. These universal human rights are very objective and do not favour a particular group of human beings over another. These rights acknowledge the existence of human life and its worth without any form of discrimination. The universal human rights should be deemed as a saviour by all cultures. This is because regardless of cultural values, some people within these cultures are usually bent on oppressing other people. The International Criminal Court is a tool that ensures that such people face the consequences of violating against these laws. The current incidence o