As much as I'd like these rights to apply to me, inalienable means they can't be taken away, not that they apply to aliens, terrestrial or otherwise.
I'm not religious, so I don't believe in a "creator" in the most literal sense, but doesn't this imply that (from the government's perspective) that these rights were given by God, and cannot be taken away by a government?
Again, I'm aware that the declaration is not a legally binding document, but I feel like it symbolizes the ideals of what the US was supposed to be.
I'm not a lawyer or a political philosopher or an ethicist, I'm just a mediocre software engineer, so I will acknowledge that I'm speaking out of my ass on this; I'm just a guy who has read a few books and has a frustrating adherence to my principles.
This is no different, for example, from applying for a research grant and getting denied on the basis of the application. The government examined your speech in the application and decided not to give you money, is this a free speech suppression?
> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Which would seem to be irrespective of nationality. I think that today, we understand that "men" was meant as a generic term for "person", but the rest of that sentence seems to say that everybody who is a creation of God (which is understood to be everybody) has those unalienable rights. It sure reads to me like it says "everyone on Earth has these rights" not just "people in these colonies have these rights".
I am trolling a little bit here, since I don't actually believe we (the U.S.) should insist on our Constitutional protections applying to non-citizens. But that is what it says to me.