belated response but:
> I did. I've grown up and moved on.
Belittling me as what, immature? for pointing out a completely valid part of history and philosophy, is hardly a compelling argument. I think you should read some more on philosophy to understand what I said better.
> I believe it's a universal truth
It's a self created concept of how people should be. By definition it can't be a universal truth. It isn't a scientific observation (like all your other examples). I don't believe it, and given it is a human concept, it isn't universal (else I'd believe it as well). Again, I suggest even a basic intro into philosophy.
> The world _is_ like that.
No it isn't. Most people in the world, live to survive, not any lofty notion of 'pursuit of happiness', or even a concept of "rights". Simply survival, by nature that is what most animals live for, you could perhaps say that is the universal truth (empirically), as that is what is observed.
> Note that where people have a chance to run their own affairs, live unafraid of their government, and etc they prefer it over the alternative.
An example would help illustrate the point? I think you'll find that throughout human history there has been very little example of 'human rights'. Even in modern times, a lot of "rights" are ignored by (possibly) every country. It is just a convenient and simple way to think about how societies should act. It is by no means the be and end all though.
I understand the want to be idealistic, and the draw to simple solutions. But consider the notion, that perhaps more people could have a better life without the notion of "rights". Perhaps there are other ways to think about this that is closer to human nature, or hold more benefits.