I'm not aware of the term "in(un)alienable rights" being in the constitution, Gid. As for the declaration, those rights include "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Feel free to set those down in some legally defined form for me. No doubt some people consider gay marriage to fit in there with "happiness", too, and yet you don't consider it a right.
"The truth is, there are some rights our founding fathers DID feel were inviolable and inalienable. This is why the Bill of Rights does not GRANT us rights, but rather limits the power of the government."
And those limits have been amended and re-amended. Feel free to point out the list of things we can't limit through an amendment to the constitution. You can settle this by just listing those things that are specifically ensured regardless of the will of the people.
I figure you'll point to the first couple of amendments, which isn't really valid, since we know we can repeal amendments, we've done it before. That's not saying we ever would, but you're saying we CAN'T, which is a very different thing. According to you, the courts can veto anything we want to pass, no matter how large the majority, so long as they consider it an unalienable right.
So basically, own the courts, rule the nation. The will of the people is secondary.