No that is exactly the topic. You can't quote the Bill of Rights like scripture as the end all, be all of validity of the argument and then say "well it has to do with the Constitution".
Of course it does, the Bill of Rights are just the first 10 amendments. Nothing more, nothing less.
They do not say that we are assured of these rights by nature, by virtue of providence, nor by the Almighty himself, rather, they state these are the things the federal government will ensure, until they are repealed or made otherwise obsolete by legislation.
I agree that you and I disagree.
Where did I say that the Bill of Rights was the end all be all? I think you are thinking you saw something that you didn't. If it were laws don't you think they would have called it the Bill of Laws? Rights are rights. Laws are Laws. Rights cannot be given by government. They can however be infringed upon and taken away.
