I truncated the quote, not to abuse, but to specify the response.
Surely, like all dictionary questions they just record usage, so they beg the question. For example 'oppressive power'; what you find oppressive and I find oppressive may be two different things. Likewise a 'rigorous' condition.
If you feel disinclined to distinguish between democratic authority and 'God given rights', let me put it another way: Suppose somebody decides to kill the US President. Since the President has been elected, is that necessarily bad? Or, if the person considers the President has interfered with some right they consider as 'God given', might it be a legitimate action?
Since you feel the need to move beyond weapons, you have realized doorways for further inquiry. It is a fascinating consideration, considering the energy of creativity that the document has unleashed by tapping into infinite potentiality, and advancing the human condition beyond that of the indigenous, aboriginal cannibalism that Christopher Columbus sailed into. http://hartzog.org/j/cannibals.html
Although I have no need to answer repeated quizzes when the answers are there in the public domain to discover, I do encourage understanding of the document through research and contemplation, a document of words that has, more than any other, improved the conditions of humanity by alleviating much suffering in the world where possible, such as helping to rebuild the world after the big one. Those words that transcend time and space have created the world, you might say.
It is an informative reply, in that you seem to be unwilling or unable to give a clear answer.
