Answer:
Answer
The definition of "unalienable rights," is those rights that cannot be surrendered, sold or transferred to someone else - the government, for example, or another person. Some people refer to these as "natural" or "God-given" rights (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness). Certain unalienable rights, such as a Social Security number, however, are "unalienable" only because the law prohibits reassigning your number to someone else.
In contrast, "inalienable rights" are those rights that can only be transferred with the consent of the person possessing those rights.
The Declaration of Independence talks about "unalienable rights."
Answer
I depends on how you define "rights". Webster has it as "something to which one has a just claim" or "the power or privilege to which one is justly entitled" or "something one may claim as properly due". This doesn't mean that you always possess this "something" or "privilege", it just means that there are certain things that you have a just claim to, or to which you are justly entitled or that you may claim as properly due. These aren't unalienable realities, but rather rights.
Others, including governments may violate your God-given rights, by violating the Creator's rules, but that doesn't take away the appropriateness of your claim to it. Violating your rights, doesn't remove your rights. It prevents you from exercising your rights. You still have certain rights, the founders would claim, given to you by your Creator.
[Some people confuse] "rights" with "realities". Perhaps due to an absence in that ethic of an absolute "rightness". If that ethical view is accepted, then the word "right" as an abstract thing to which you are entitled, is truly nonsense. Then truly,in such an ethic, no one ever has any cause to complain when they are inconvenienced, slapped or killed. For that matter, why would anything matter at all on any level.