Philosophy

Historically, there are three foundations attributed to rights: god, nature, and humans.

For god to be the ground for rights, god has to exist, whoever is asserting that god is the ground of rights has to know who god is, and what he/she/it wants. If you think that you know these things, you can attribute rights to god; if not, not. However, you might have to dispute your conclusions with those who have other ideas about god.

For nature to be ground of rights, the person asserting it has to meet Hume's challenge to show how, logically, an "ought" statement can be derived from an "is" statement. If you can meet Hume's challenge, you can attribute rights to nature; if not, not.

For humans to be the ground of rights, there isn't an epistemological problem or a logical problem. Whatever folks say is right, is right. Different folks at different times and places say that different things are right. This certainly is in accord with everyday and historical experience. The problem with making humans the ground of rights, is that rights lose the universality that is usually associated with them.