The Declaration of Indepence is the foundational document for the Consitution. It reflects the thinking and mindset of the writers of the Constitution. The fact that human rights are God given is stated plainly there.
The fact that the Bill of Rights was codified despite objection is further justification to believe that the founding fathers did not see those rights as God given and thus HAD to be ratified and agreed to by the states.
Thank you for proving my point! The people who objected to adding a bill of rights to the Constitution did so because they believed people (like you) might one day argue the rights were created when they were codified in writing, instead of recognizing them as pre-existing rights that were being affirmed in writing.
If the God given rights go beyond life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; what are they?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
You don't agree that "amoung" means there are other rights than the three being listed? What about the the right to privacy. There is no explicit right to privacy in the Bill of Rights, but courts have recognized its existence. How could they recognize a right that isn't in the Constitution? Because it is a God given right (one of those "amoung" rights).
I am not denying the existence of “rights”. We have an abundance of “rights”. But those rights exist because they have been agreed upon through a democratic process, not because God has ordained them. There may have been those that disagreed with this view at the time of the writing of the Constitution but they were overruled and our framework of “rights” were defined by law, not God. Your opinion may take the side of those who believed that “rights” were God given and should not be enshrined by law but the fact is; they were defined as such despite objections.