And do you think the rights we call inalienable are truly inalienable?
Yes. If, for example, human beings do not possess the objective moral property "dignity" or "worth" then there can be no such thing as a real crime against humanity (cf. Nuremberg). Men may not be unjustly deprived of dignity unless they really have dignity in the first place. If human dignity and the right to life are things we merely choose by fiat to ascribe to ourselves then these things are nothing more than "useful fictions".
Assuming we are an accidental arrangement of atoms, we are also an accidental arrangement of atoms that is conscious of ourselves, cause and effect, and capable of evaluating the effects of our actions. We also are an arrangement of atoms that has only recently begun to see the possibility that we are not inherently relatively significant. These factors are why we believe our arrangement takes precedent.
I'll get to this later. I've got to go.