Also doesn't help that most people don't really know what rights are, nor the rather important difference between positive and negative rights, and that the former is pretty fucking heinous when put under any sort of moral examination.

For those unaware, the most basic way to put it is that positive rights involve a person being entitled to the good or service of another, while a negative right is that others are obliged to inaction lest they infringe upon anothers rights.

Both examples of these exist within the American Constitution, though most are negative rights. Examples of a few clear cut negative rights are things like the First, Second and Fourth Amendments, while an example of a positive right is the Sixth Amendment, specifically the part about a Jury as that explicitly requires the service of another to achieve.

These distinctions are VERY important to anyone interested in the morality and preservation of human rights and freedoms, and the ignorance about it is how the left can so often and eagerly get away with calling for things like healthcare to be a human right, even though that outright claims that people are entitled to the labour of another person, and denial of that would be an infringement upon their human rights. Only problem is that's also fucking slavery, which is all that positive rights amount to at the end of the day.

This is also why so many statists assert that human rights are granted or bestowed upon people by governments and not innate to the human condition, because it allows them to assert that certain aspects of slavery is fine and okay when it serves their purposes.