Let me take this a bit out of order.
First, lest establish something. Just like the word “believe”, the word “right(s)” has more than one meaning.
#1 “a legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way.”
Is often confused with:
#2 “being in accordance with what is just, good, or proper right conduct”
You presume that I believe the rights granted by society #1, is equal or the same as #2.
Is it that hard to believe that rights are granted to you by those that have the power to enforce them? In democratic societies where the people have a say, the people who enforce “rights” are elected by the plurality.
For example, the plurality is slowly changing its mind about smoking pot.
Whether smoking is good or bad, your right to use it is determined by the people who support/ don’t support it, that does not fundamentally change the fact that pot is/ or is not bad. Rights, don’t make right.
Abortion is another controversial example. Having the legal right to legally obtain an abortion does not make it morally right. I find it hard to believe anyone here would argue that.
So Hitler convinced some of the German people that Jews should be killed. Jews had no rights (#1). Does that mean Hitler was right (#2)? Of course not.
Now as I said, all rights (#1) are a reflection of societies values and the moral systems they create when they form groups.
Do you value private property? Then you convince your neighbors to hold that value. If enough of the people around you believe that private property is a value worth holding, then they can agree that ownership of private property is a “right”.
The problem is simple. Some groups value the wrong things and the rights they extend to each other cause needless suffering.
Thus it is possible to declare something as a right (#1) that is actually wrong (#2).
Sure, what rights do you have in a place like Somalia, or in the Mountains of Afghanistan?
The Constitution says we have rights “endowed by our creator”. That is a wonderful thought. I sincerely hope that most people believe that, but I wonder how that endowment of rights by your creator will help you in a place like North Korea?
If you were captured in N. Korea and sentenced to death for something trivial, would you protest your rights? Would you try to convince others that you have the right to live?
If, just for the sake of argument, you were able to convince enough people that you have the right to live and they agreed and overthrew Kim and declared that people have “rights”.
Who saved you? Your creator, or you, convincing others around you that you have rights?
See where I’m going here?
Of course, I believe in good and evil.
Good things (on a group level) are things that lead to a happy, healthy cooperative flourishing society. Bad are things that are detrimental to society.
Evil, in my opinion, is beyond bad. I can do the wrong thing, or support bad ideas and just be wrong. If my intent is to do good, even if I’m wrong, that does not make me evil.
Evil is done when people intentionally do things to cause the suffering of others AND derive enjoyment from it. Now like most things, bad and evil aren’t black and white and there are times when causing harm can actually be good (see the “trolly problem”).
I don’t recall using the term “equal rights”.
By definition, an “unprotected right” is not a right.
I am reminded me of the term, mandatory volunteer, or a married bachelor. It’s a non-sequitur.