We believe that all people have certain rights, which are theirs from birth and which cannot be taken from them.
That means nothing to the Statist. By what authority are they born with those rights? Why can't the government restrict or abolish them if 'the people' see fit for their safety and security? Such a statement simply hands the Statist the argument that rights are simply the grant of some man named Doug Loss and the people that signed onto those rights. Therefore, other men can change them on a whim if they see fit.
If you leave God, Providence, Nature's God, or Creator out of the establishing statement of where Rights are derived, then they have no more foundation or permanency than sand. If rights are given or agreed to by men, they can be legally diminished or abolished by men. Look, they have already done this when our establishing document ALREADY STATES where our Rights are derived, because the bulk of our population no longer considers themselves beholden to God, Providence, Nature's God or the Creator. The majority now believe government is the arbiter of rights, justice and fairness. Without a Higher Authority than men, government will forever be used as the tool to diminish, regulate and abolish the rights they do not want interfering with their rule.
These include the right to live, the right to speak freely and without retribution, the right to own property and do with it anything they desire, the right to live their lives in the way they desire,
Anything they desire?? We already have that. It's how people can lose their livelihoods because they refuse to bake a cake, and grown men can decide they are little girls and use bathrooms they want to use. Speaking freely without retribution is already being enjoyed by BLM calling for people to kill cops.
You must include language that makes it clear that a civil society is ordered liberty, not anarchy whereby everyone can do 'as they desire'. As a property owner, I should be able to do with my own things, what I see fitting as to best provide for the happiness of myself and family. Not what 'I desire'. That word opens the door to licentiousness and anarchy. Liberty has to be grounded upon the bulwark foundation of moral principles that are out of the reach and authority of men - meaning they cannot be changed for a different set of moralities. In Europe - what was once considered morality is being replaced with Sharia Law. Here, our morality is being replaced with Hedonistic Marxism. As a people we either agree that the biblical/Judeo-Christian morality we were established by is immutable and the foundation everything stands upon - or we don't. And if we do not - then this exercise of creating a statement of Conservative Belief is meaningless. Everyone will do what is right in his own eyes, or as cede all authority to the state to decide. And we will continue this slide into tyranny.
the right to associate with others or to refrain from associating with others, the right to defend themselves against any attacks by others, and the right to defend others exercising the same rights when those others are attacked. These rights are absolute; they can only be restrained when exercising them would interfere with the rights of others to exercise the same rights.
I would be more specific and add a few. The right to do business or refrain from doing business with persons, agendas or entities that conflict with the mission, conscience or principles of the company owners. The right to assemble and belong to any group without interference, (excepting groups that are hostile to, or at war with these rights and foundations be they foreign entities or domestic). To be able to peaceably protest without interfering with the movements or rights of others in places of their own choosing without restriction to locations and times. The right to self defense and the right to defend others exceeds all other rights and preserves those rights from infringement to preserve and maintain liberty. Therefore, the inalienable, insoluble and permanent right of the people to keep and bear weapons such as firearms, swords, blades, ammunition and the materials to manufacture, supply and otherwise provide for the possession of and use of such arms, cannot, shall not and will not be infringed, limited, restricted or abolished by congress, the courts or the Executive.
My .02¢
