I didn't downvote you, but I'll play devil's advocate and make an argument over why access to Facebook is a right. In the normal course of events, a non-govern

I didn't downvote you, but I'll play devil's advocate and make an argument over why access to Facebook is a right. In the normal course of events, a non-government company is free to decide who it does business with. But there is a case to be made that this changes if society reorganizes itself so that use of a particular service is no longer optional. For example, insurance companies would a priori be free to decide who they do business with. Except that it's illegal to drive without liability insurance, and in some places, either because of the physical fact of distance or bad town planning, it's effectively mandatory to drive if you want to be a functioning member of society. Therefore in some jurisdictions, you do actually have the legal right to buy insurance. There are social circles these days in which you effectively cannot participate without having a Facebook account. There is therefore a case to be made that Facebook is obliged to either make sure people aren't excluded from having accounts, or set up some kind of federated system whereby you can participate in Facebook circles from some other social medium. I myself don't use Facebook, so I don't have a dog in that fight either way, but I think it's a valid argument.