I'm struggling with this assertion. It sounds right at first, but the more I think about it, the more it rubs me the wrong way. 

Rights are granted, by way of being born human. If you were not born human, then you would have no rights. 

Rights are not granted by humans, though. (I'm a Christian and I believe that what we call rights are our birthright bestowed on us by God, so that's where I'm coming from, and I'm sure that there is a really long discussion that can and should be had about that.)

Therefore, since rights are granted by God, no human may take them away without our permission. So I disagree with the next part of your assertion.

There's a part missing for the last bit in order for me to fully agree with it. Rights SHOULD be defended, even for others with whom you disagree on how they are exercising their rights. The should part comes from the fact that they are a precious gift from God, and as such, they are worthy of great efforts to retain. 

Most of my arguments can be made from a more naturalistic point of view, also, but, I'm not espousing those in my current rebuttal. 

So, I think that a more correct assertion is:

Because I am human, I am granted rights. Any attempt to take these from me will be met with the full force and means I am able to wield to defend them. 

It's not complete, but, I think it's more logically correct than the original.