A “Natural Right” that requires the infrastructure of a government isn’t natural at all. A natural right belongs to every person, regardless of the imprimatur of some superseding body to invoke it. This goes back to your insistence that only the governments within arbitrary lines drawn on a map by men can exercise these rights, which makes a mockery of these supposedly “natural rights.”
You are going all Yogi Berra on me. A government (such as that of the United Kingdom) which doesn't recognize the natural law rights articulated by people like Locke, Rutherford, Vattel, and so forth, is not going to support "natural law."
A government which itself is founded on the concept of natural law, will. But it cannot do so until it is actually founded. You need to keep cause and effect in their proper sequence.
A natural right belongs to every person, regardless of the imprimatur of some superseding body to invoke it.
Natural rights belong to every person, but without a governing body to recognize and enforce these rights, they may very well be deprived of them.
This goes back to your insistence that only the governments within arbitrary lines drawn on a map by men can exercise these rights,
My "insistence" is that the standards used by the Founders in establishing the United States, remain valid when applied to other states. If you have an issue with "arbitrary lines" which defined the Southern states, take it up with the Founders, because they accepted these defining lines when they asserted the right of the US to be independent from the UK.