The Senate and a House committee dipped into the complex foreign policy question of human rights yesterday, with some members in both sides calling for action more forceful than President Carter has proposed.

The Senate, debating a bill authorizing $5.2 billion in new subscriptions to world lending agencies, beat back by seven votes, 50 to 43,a Carter-opposed amendment instruting the U.S. representative to each multinational lending agency to vote automatically against any loan to a nation exhibiting a "patterno of gross violation" of human rights.

The amendment had already passed the House even though the Carter administration called it too inflexible to allow the United States any leverage in influencing the affected nations.

With the administration's concurrence, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee version of the bill simply instructed U.S. representatives to "use the voice and vote of the U.S. to endeavor" to help human rights.

In the House, meanwhile, the Appropriations Committee reported a $7 billion foreign aid money bill for fiscal 1978 but cut off all military assistance to Ethiopia, Nicaragua and Uruguay because "the committee feels that the current degree of internal repression practices by the governments of some nations. . . warrants the termination of such aid."

It also voted to bar any aid to Uganda, Cambodia, Laos or Vietnam and to refuse military credits to Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador and Guatemala because those four countries said they didn't want any human rights conditions attached to aid. Military aid to the Philippines was cut, though not abolished, because of "violations of human rights." The committee, in its report, expressed concern over human rights in Panama and said it wants an eye kept on developments in Indonesia, Haiti, Thailand, Paraguay and the Dominican Republic, with a view toward future sanctions.

In several cases, some of the cut funds had been sought by the administration, committee aides said.

During thenal leading agencies, Hubert H. Humphrey (D-Minn.) declared that the language of the rights amendment, sponsored by Mark O. Hatfield (R-Ore.) and James Abourezk (S-S.D.), was considered too "rigid" by Carter and thus would be of less real use than the softer Senate committee language.

Abourezk snapped back, "I don't subscribe to the teory we're putting anyone in chains (with this amendment); what we're essentially trying to do is to get them out."

Hatfield charged the President with talking about human rights but said "this same President has been very selective" in his practical applications of the human rights automatic cutoff sponsored by Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) lost, 58 to 34.

Earlier, Humprey warde off a move by Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) to order U.S. representatives to vote against loans for Uganda's government. Instead, the Senate adopted a substitute declaring its "disgust" with Idi Amin, Ugaanda's chief of state.

The amendments involve loans by multinational agencies like the World Bank, International agencies like the World Bank, International Development Association, Inter American Development Bank, Asian Development Bank and African Development Fund.