It’s not a falsehood…in the sense that 1+1=3 is a falsehood. From the position of practical reality, you’re Right to exist is indeed no more than an opinion – the opinion of the of the people, in general, who share certain values. I am ‘different’ to the norm in some physical respect. If it was the opinion of my community that I therefore, on those grounds, didn’t have the right to exist then I’d be either cast out of the community or executed. There are no ‘Rights’, there are laws that reflect values. And those values are malleable – because they’re values.
Another example, we know that in certain African societies twins are regarded as the production of evil spirits and they are (perhaps ‘were’ by now) simply taken to the jungle and left there – with the presumption that they would perish. In such societies, those twins don’t have ‘rights’ to live.
In the end, ‘might’ – the prevailing values – determines what is right, and what Rights accrue to the community members. The notion of universal Human Rights treated as if Rights were inherent is nonsense.
Hence ‘speak softly but carry a big stick’ is a simple reality that may manifest in brutality from time to time as those with opposing opinions fight to assert dominance – to assert Rights.
We all have the inherent ability to think and that’s about the only inalienable ‘Right’ we have.
Yes, Might (Authority) determines Rights, not necessarily logic or fairness or the glaringly obvious, despite the fact that may make one feel uncomfortable – apologies for not providing a trigger warning!