Only slightly more absurd than the "fundamental right" to wireless internet access is the claim to publicly funded prostitution. Aside from the moral issues, this should serve as an example of why it's important to limit the role of government.
A disabled Danish man is fighting for the state to pay for him to have a prostitute visit him at home.
Torben Hansen, who has cerebral palsy, which severely affects his speech and mobility, believes his local authority should pay the extra charge he incurs when he hires a sex worker - because his disability means he cannot go to see them. His case is currently being considered.
In Denmark, local authorities compensate disabled people for extra costs incurred because of their disability.
"I want them to cover the extra expenses for the prostitutes to get here, because it's a lot more expensive getting them to come to my home rather than me going to a brothel," Mr Hansen told BBC World Service's Outlook programme.
"It's a necessity for me. I can't move very well, and it's impossible for me to go there."
Prostitution isn't illegal in Denmark, so if the public funds other expenses, why not house call girls? One politician appears to appreciate the conundrum.
Kristen Brosboel, a Social Democrat member of the Danish Parliament, is among those who have argued against Mr Hansen.
"Obviously I recognise that he has a problem that people without a disability may not have - but I disagree with the fact that we should support his visits with a prostitute with tax money," she told Outlook.
"We also spend tax money on trying to prevent prostitution, helping women out of prostitution - and we have a clear policy that this is a social problem that we want to solve.
"So I think that's very much in contradiction with spending tax money on requiring prostitutes."
When the public funds everything, contradictions are inevitable. The only solution is to limit the scope of government. The real problem in Denmark is that the public already pays for so much, how can anyone say no?