Rights do not come from moral authority, Truth, or Justice. In fact, they were conceived to be contrary to the moral authority enjoyed by the monarchs who opposed liberal democracy. We in America (and the West generally) have rights because we would not agree to the social contract forming a union without an a priori recognition that certain rights would inform and limit the union and all subsequent agreements and contracts.
The most important thing to understand about rights is that they pre-exist and are a precondition for the agreements that create majority rule, etc. Under the American system, these "preconditions" may themselves be modified by special super-majority procedures, but they are still understood to be preconditions. Rights may be created within the framework of laws but they are all inferior to the a priori rights expressed in the Constitution.
Marxists seem to propose another level of rights, but do they indeed? James Heartfield writes:
"In the higher state of communism, Marx anticipated that consumption would not be conceived as a right, but as a need to be fulfilled: 'to each according to his needs'. No question of a right there, since rights make no sense outside of the restricted arena of capitalism, and the early stage of socialism. Under communism, Marx suggested, interests would no longer be conceived of as rights, since they would not be in conflict with competing interests (in a case of generalised superfluity).
Needs and interests only rise to the level of rights UNDER A CONTRACT. Under communism, natural rights are still SUPERIOR to needs and interests. People cannot be killed, robbed or enslaved to provide "fair" distribution of resources. The communist social contract presumes the same pre-existing rights as the liberal-democratic social contract.
The one exception is property rights, but only in a limited sense. Personal property, the property of families, groups and organizations are still sacrosanct under communism. I do not believe that Marx conceived so much of sanctioning takings as he did of structuring sharing and giving.
Therefore, we start at liberal rights and end at a communist contract. You can't inflict a contract. It has to be democratically agreed to. You particularly can't inflict a contract if by attempting to do so you violate the rights pre-supposed by the order under which the contract is to be agreed to.