I know this is a facetious dismissal, but I'll try to respond anyway.

> I imagine you wanted to say "ignores the Declaration of Independence", which you quoted?

Correct.

> Sure, if you believe that this declaration endowed you with the unalienable property rights then just go ahead and don't pay the property tax, what is going to happen if your property rights are truly unalienable, right?

I'm not advocating for breaking laws, regulations, or rules of the nation I live in.

> Also, how theft would be even possible if property rights had been unalienable? If someone stole from you and you retained your property rights you could just keep enjoying your property and exclude the thief from your property as the right entitles you.

This is less about the pragmatics of 'possession' and its intricacies (the old adage 'possession is 9/10s of the law' is relevant here), and more about the policies of the governments that rule, and ultimately that answer to the people they rule.

If I am advocating for anything, it is change in laws and the appropriate limits on government to limit the levying of taxes on possessed things. In this case, land.