I'm a bit thrown off by the phrase 'right to' above. Does it mean 'ability to exercise' (yes,no), does it mean 'deserving-ness of' (yes,no), does it mean 'inalienable right (itself a semantic mess) of' (no,no), does it mean 'correctness to be labeled as having' (no,no)?

Except for the inalienable thing, the 'no's above should really be read as 'not yet's.

Then there's the whole question of what liberty and democracy mean, but I think we have enough of a common understanding to skip that discussion for the moment.