> Anyways, rights exist a priori, regardless of the capacity for any power to enforce said rights. Negative rights don't actually require enforcement because they aren't coercive
Prove it.
> Think through your example about the doctor. If you (a doctor) and I are stranded on an island and I break my leg, the "right to healthcare" would imply that you are obligated to help me, and I have the moral right to coerce you (violently if required) to help me. Would you agree to this proposition?
This a fantasy you've created by deliberately using the wrong definition of the words involved.
The "right to healthcare" means that your government should do its best to make sure people can see doctors and receive healthcare related treatment when they need it.