Poster didn't say fight for your rights (which is what many, especially military have done to ensure no one takes them away), it was provide for your "rights", which is a screwed up concept where politicians (rulers dictators) decide what rights people may or may not have. It's a question of what some see as rights. Some think they have a right to have others provide for them. How is that not being forced into servitude to the providers? Some say they have a right to free healthcare, but it means someone else has to work to pay for it. How is it a right when your having it is contingent on someone else giving up money? Rights are inalienable. No one can give or take them. They are equal, meaning all have them. Government's role isn't to provide rights, it's to protect the ones we have. Promoting the general welfare isn't saying people should be forced to provide for the general welfare. Insisting that able-bodied people at least train for a job is promoting the general welfare. Handing them stuff without conditions is just enabling them to remain poor. And government should never force one half to provide for other people. That isn't guaranteeing rights. If we all had the right to free stuff, we'd all get it. As it is, the government steals from some so they can continue offering something to others. It's not a right to be subsidized and the government does it by forcing others to provide it. If they raise taxes to provide freebies, you must pay or face penalties. Well, unless you're Al Sharpton.