[Lmo56]

As I read the his sentence, it appears as if he defines four “truths” which are self evident... 1. All men are created equal, 2. they are endowed, by their creator, with rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, 3. governments are established to secure those rights and 4. if that government becomes oppressive, the people have the right to abolish it and form a new one that isn’t. It is rather odd, to me, that the first two rights begin with “thats” which are not capitalized, but the second two “thats” are capitalized even though, grammatically, the sentence has not ended.

There are 4 truths, but only 3 rights: Life, Liberty, and Happiness. The rights are capitalized.

If the founders thought that we could make up new rights, they would have stated in the next sentence:

That to secure these rights and others, governments are instituted among men ..."

Instead of:

That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."

The only rights mentioned are ONLY the 3 from the previous sentence.

See the text:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Us_declaration_independence.jpg

[1raider1]

Sorry, not thinking while composing. I wrote “rights” when I should have written “truths”.

[octex]

only 3 rights: Life, Liberty, and Happiness.
**********************
Happiness is not one of the rights; only the PURSUIT of happiness is a right.

[kiryandil]

While inalienable and unalienable are today used interchangeably with inalienable more common, the terms have historically sometimes been distinguished.

Regarding current usage being interchangeable:

The unalienable rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence could just as well have been inalienable, which means the same thing. Inalienable or unalienable refers to that which cannot be given away or taken away. However, the Founders used the word "unalienable" as defined by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1:93, when he defined unalienable rights as: "Those rights, then, which God and nature have established, and therefore called natural rights, such as life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws to be more effectually invested in every man than they are; neither do they receive any additional strength when declared by the municipal laws to be inviolable. On the contrary, no human legislature has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner shall himself commit some act that amounts to a forfeiture."...in other words a person may do something to forfeit their unalienable rights...for instance the unalienable right to freedom which can be forfeited by the commission of a crime for which they may be punished by their loss of freedom. However, once they are freed after serving their punishment their right is restored.