I recognize that a lot of people do not know what natural rights are.  So I’m writing this to explain what natural rights are and how they apply to US government.  

Having a right means having access to the use of something. When you own something you don’t own it in the sense that it becomes a part of you. The thing is a part of the universe, so it belongs to God.

Having ownership of property in a social sense means that you have the use of if.  If you buy a loaf of bread, you have the social right to use it as you see fit. After you eat it, it becomes owned by you in a natural sense because it becomes a part of you.

When you buy a piece of land, you don’t really own it.  God owns the land.  You only own social rights to it; the rights to access it, and use the resources found on it, etc. 

Social rights are legalisms.  They are granted by a society.  The ownership of property is assigned as part of a social contract which is enforced through an empowered government.

Natural rights are granted by God. Natural rights are rights we are born with which do not require a social contract.  We are granted life by God.  No society can grant life.  A society can create a life through artificial means, but the fact of life itself cannot be created, and neither can the entirety of the events that constitute a life. 

All living things seek out a happier state of being. The philosophers of the enlightenment understood that a tree in a forest will grow its branches to reach out to get the maximum sunlight, and the roots will grow out to reach the best nutrients from the soil.  They understood that pursuit of the tree is to acquire a happier state of being.  The philosophers observed this phenomena and recognized that this is the nature of all living things.  Our living occupation is this pursuit of happiness.  People cannot legislate this away. Our pursuit of happiness is a natural right.  

Life is a natural right because we are all alive. We naturally desire to continue living. 

Liberty is a natural right for people because we all make choices. We cannot not make choices. To pursuit our happiness must be free to make choices.

The thing that marks these rights as rights is the fact that we know that we have the right to use force to keep people from taking them away from us.  

When we see one person trying to take away the ability of a second person to live, the we recognize that the second person has the right to use reasonable force to prevent the first person from doing so.  

When we see one person trying to take away the ability of a second person to thrive (to better themselves, or be happy), we recognize that the second person has the right to use reasonable force to prevent the first person from doing so.

When we see one person trying to take away the ability of a second person to make the choices necessary for living and thriving, we recognize that the second person has the right to use reasonable force to prevent the first person from doing so.

Social classes are artificial.  They are used to deny one person the right to thrive, and in some cases to survive.  Social equality is a natural right of thriving.  When we look at humanity naturalistically, people are people.  We may be different according to an assumed divine plan, but we are all equally human in nature and in natural rights. 

Natural rights are unalienable. They cannot be separated from you because they are not a social contract. They are natural, self-evident truths as opposed to assumed or socially imposed truths.

Natural rights are unalienable.  In the original draft of the US Declaration of Independence Jefferson’s used the word “inalienable.”  This was changed to “unalienable” in the final draft. “Inalienable” has its origins in English laws and it was used in reference to the inheritance of title: “prince,” “lord,” etc.  The title of “prince” was legally inalienable.  In other words, law could not separate the prince from his title.  Inalienable rights are legalisms.  They are not natural, so “inalienable” was not used for the idea of natural rights.  ”Inalienable” was changed to “unalienable.”  Historically, “unalienable” has it roots in naturalism.  The nuance is lost on most readers of the Declaration.  Perhaps the use of  ”unalienable” was meant in the same sense the “amoral” applies to the concept of morality.  ”Amorality” is outside the concept of morality.  Some acts are moral, some are immoral, and some acts are amoral.  Likewise, some rights are alienable, some are inalienable, and some are unalienable.  ”Inalienable” would be with respect to human law.  ”Unalienable” would be outside the legal concept of alienableness, but it would be in the concept of God’s natural law.

When we created the US government we drew on the right of the pursuit of happiness to create a government that was more likely to meet the people’s desire to survive and thrive.  The people make choices and benefit or suffer from those choices. The authors of the US Constitution did their best to ensure that our choices are not limited by the tenets of any one religion, and that we are not forced to accept principles of law that originate in tenets that are clearly unnatural.

God, the mysterious Creator of Nature, is essential to natural government. When we established the subservience of the US to God, as the Creator of Nature, we did two important things:

First, we created the groundwork for natural truths as dominant over the unnatural truths of revealed faiths. When natural truths and supernatural truths are in conflict, the natural truth is assumed correct. This gives social guidance when people of one faith come into conflict with people of another faith.  Natural law, not the law of divine revelation, is the ultimate law.

Second, we created attachment to government.  In theory, a government could be formed that is based on an atheistic naturalism. The problem with doing so is that free people who are governing themselves need to buy-in to the government. When God is absent from government, religious people will not attach themselves to the government. Without this buy-in, an atheistic naturalistic government may collapse from lack of involvement from the people, perhaps descending into tyranny.

The invocation of God, the Creator of Nature, as the highest authority in government invites religious people to participate in politics. When we invoke the name of God in government, people who believe religiously in a creator God have a sense of ownership and, very important, responsibility.

A proper Naturalist government will establish God, the Creator of Nature, as its highest authority in order to prevent the irrational beliefs of other people’s religion from becoming the rule of law, while at the same time a proper Naturalist government will involve the religious segment of the population in their own governance.  Since God is present in government, and by virtue of Naturalism God is not allowed to speak through prophets, the government can be properly considered to be a Deist government.

In the Deistic Natural Religion, Natural Laws with their associated Natural Rights are our tenets handed down directly from God, much like the Ten Commandments are to Jews, or the Koran is to Muslims.  Just as a Christian nation would create its government based on the teachings of Jesus, or a Muslim country would create its government based on the teachings of Mohamed, a Deist nation would create its government based on Natural Law.  And we have done so here in the US.

The role of a Deist government is not to assign Natural rights, it cannot do that, only God can.  The role of a Deist government is to allow its citizens to protect and exercise their Natural rights.

The citizens of a Deist society in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice [with respect to natural law and rights], insure domestic tranquility [when the rights of one person conflict with the rights of another], provide for the common defense [of the rights of the people with respect to each other and to outside states], promote the general welfare [in support of the pursuit of happiness], and secure the blessings of liberty will form a government in support of those goals.

Stumble it!