"The fact that something is not forbidden" is different from "the existence of a positive right to something". In the latter case, there would probably need to

"The fact that something is not forbidden" is different from "the existence of a positive right to something". In the latter case, there would probably need to be a relatively convenient opt-out mechanism. Your comment is a bit like saying... "The right to potable water is not violated because individuals are free to build their own desalination plants and move closer to the ocean. Oh, they don't have the resources to do that? That's unfortunate."