[a-priori]

Whether they're synonymous is entirely a matter of your world view with respect to the origin of the state's monopoly on the legitimate use of force, which is the defining feature of a state. Do individuals delegate their right to the use of force to the state, in the process giving them a monopoly on it? Or do states impose said monopoly on the individual, in effect overriding their natural rights? To avoid committing a fallacy here: or is there a third option?

[foobarbazqux]

The fallacy is that the choice is presented as either/or instead of both/and. Some of my natural rights are embodied in law, some of them aren't, that's how it goes.