A clever Natural Law observation.
What you see in the First Amendment is a restriction laid upon the government, not the establishment of the right to speak freely.
The right to free speech itself is not established in the Constitution. The right itself is established by God, and conferred upon each individual by God upon that individual’s creation.
In effect, there is no Constitutional basis for the freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, and papers, etc. All these are perceived to already exist per a common understanding of Natural Law
Also, the preamble of the Constitution tells us that one of the purposes of the Constitution is to "secure the Blessings of Liberty". Well, who is to say that this alleged "liberty" exists in the first place, let alone that this unproven "liberty" issues "blessings"? That's simply a matter of opinion, don't you think?
Heh, what tangible, Objective, verifiable scientific evidence did our founding fathers have that this so-called "liberty" existed? They told each other that it existed, so at best it's a 'because-I-say-so-postulation'; and based on what? Religion! That's what! Be it a personal abstract belief or opinion, or an official orthodoxy.
So at worst governmental endorsement of this alleged "liberty" violates the Wall of Separation.
Okay, I had my fun, back to cleaning the house....