Exactly. I didn't think this part would be so controversial. But, given what happened with Chuck Todd last week, (
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/27/chuck-todd-roy-moores-remarks-on-god-indicate-he-d/ ) it's not surprising that a lot of people don't understand this. I thought the use of the word unalienable would kind of be a give away...guess not.
"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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
That is what was so revolutionary (no pun intended) about the American Revolution. The concept that we, as human beings, have certain rights that are not granted by governments. We have them through the natural law (or God for those that believe). We don't have them because they're in the Constitution, the Constitution was written to codify the fact that they exist and to protect them from the government. That is why our Constitution is a document of negative liberties (stating what the government CAN'T do) vs. other constitutions that are of positive liberties (what the government must do).
To put it more simply: if the government gives us our rights (through the Constitution), then it can take them away, too.