The Right-Based Avenue appears to be the most viable option. In essence, the Right-Based Avenues dictate pursuing those rights that are fundamentally granted to the individuals, instead of protecting rights based on a particular interest. Essentially, the Right-Based Avenue virtually eliminates the conflict of interests in assigning quantitative measurement to proportionate rights which may in turn preserve those in minority interest. The most powerful pro argument for the Right-Based Avenue is certainly the ability to have a predetermined and understood set of rights that are universal and will not be changed or challenged based on material or tangible interests. Hence leading to a sense of fairness based on societal values that emphasize individual rights. However, the opponent may argue that in a democratic society in which the concept of majority is fundamental to social, cultural as well as financial decisions, the Right-Based Avenue creates the daunting perception that minority / individual interests outweigh the greater good of the collective/majority. Yet such argument is flawed: even in democratic societies, the building stones are still compiled of individual units i.e. individual human beings. No collective can precede the rights of its individual units without alienating those units that form the collective. Similarly, the concept of a collective sense of entitlement can be found within the sense of entitlement by individuals. Hence, it is impossible to maintain coherent unity within the collective, by eliminating the triumphing needs of individuals. Brought to you by World Consulting Group נYour premiermanagement consulting firm. The postEthical Analysis first appeared onWorld Consulting Group.