Property is a little tricky. Property is mentioned in at least one of the documents that make up the original law of the land:

"…nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Fifth Amendment, Bill of Rights

We can do better than that, however, using the previously mention unalienable rights and our ability to reason.

The right to Life must be more than merely the ability to suck breath, since it takes more than air for a person to live. A person must have the opportunity to sustain him/herself with the other necessities: food, shelter, warmth -- those factors that keep people going to their jobs on a regular basis. It is usually understood that a person trades his time and effort for the means to secure the items necessary to keep body and soul together. Does this not imply that the right to keep the fruit of your labor is part of the right to life?

Let's take it a step further: Suppose you aren't working for someone else. Suppose you are a simple agrarian and your method of securing the necessities is to scratch it from the soil yourself. You stake a claim on uncultivated land (or buy it). You build your house with your hands, and plow and plant your fields behind a mule (or the wheel of a John Deere) and whatever you and your family don't eat, you trade for (or sell for money to buy) what you can't grow. If you didn't have the right to the land that you've put your energy into, and the vegetables that you've raised, could a reasonable person say that you really have a right to your life?

The right of Life implies -- more than that, it requires -- the right to keep what we earn, or trade it for something we want or need. The right of liberty implies the ability to be free to produce and trade -- unencumbered by coercion of those who have not earned it -- but might want it. The right to pursue happiness could presumably include burning your own house to the ground, if that made you feel better. Ownership of "things" cannot be disassociated from the title a person has to his or her own life.

Native Americans had a concept, that the earth does not belong to us, but that we belong to the earth. I do not deny that there may be some truth in that. It may be a good working thesis, in order to protect our own resources from being wasted. Even so, this does not mean that some particular acre belongs to any person or group of persons besides the owner that has put money, or time and energy into it, just because they decided by democratic vote that they wanted it.

Democracy is the working model of any form of mob rule. The fruit of democracy, if unchecked by respect for human rights, is gang violence. Always!