Concerning your claim that individual rights are the foundation of democracy, read below.
We should abandon the liberal interpretation of democracy, which is built upon the assumption that the government should provide a framework of rights that respects people as free and independent agents, capable of choosing their own values. Under this assumption, the government should be neutral in regards to peoples' values and not seek to impose any one viewpoint on everybody.
By contrast, I adhere to the Republican theory(not to be confused with the GOP); which states that liberty depends upon people sharing in self-government in accordance with the common good. However, in order to achieve this, it's necessary that the citizens adhere to certain(not to mention common) sets of civic virtues; and the government cannot be neutral in this, but has to actively promote such virtues.
And in order for a government to truely be of the people, for the people; its laws have to actively reflect the values of the people it's governing. If we're talking about a Christian people here, then its laws must reflect Christian values. Of course, to address inevitable diversity of opinions and values, there's the concept of federalism in place.
In regards to the promotion of appropriate virtues; it is also important for the government to protect those institutions that help in the promotion of such virtues. Classic case would be churches, whose moral teachings promote cultivation of personal character. The same also goes with the family, which is the basic foundation of society and provides for its long-term longevity.
Wheras the Liberal interpretation of "individual rights" places more emphasis upon the viewpoint of negative freedom
(freedom from restrictions and responsibilities); the Republican interpretation place more emphasis on positive freedom
(freedom in accordance with responsibilities to the common good).