As mentioned, the key here is that "right to..." classically means (in both Europe and US) that one cannot prevented or banned.

This is more fundamental because it indeed used to be that whole parts of society were banned from doing things or owning things.

We now take this fundamental right for granted, which might explain the shift to interpreting "right" as "being entitled to".

There is another aspect in your comment, which to conflate "not being to obtain" with "discrimination". I think this is going a step too far.