Resources on earth also don't have to be lifted out of Earth's gravity well either, and you don't have to go to space to get them. Even if we needed something off world, nothing says we need colonies for that. Just mine it and bring it home.
But in space there are even more resources and there is no reason to ignore that fact. As for colonies, if history is anything to go by, they'll pop up all on their own as people start prospecting and homesteading. And because it's cheaper for the company to just have people on location at the mines all the time. And those people are going to want to stuff to do when off duty. And those people will want to start or bring families and soon enough, you have a thriving town sitting there atop your mine.
There are plenty of resources in space, but like I said, if we need them, we can get them without living there. If we need something from space, it is more likely to be from asteroids rather than planets, and it makes more sense use one asteroid up and move on rather than build a long term settlement there. The cost of building a computer system capable of ore extraction with minimal human input is going to be high, but not nearly as high getting humans out to the asteroid belt, keeping them alive through their mission, and getting them back home safely.
You mean largely left alone to live how they want?
... I mean, this question could be tacked on to any activity not strictly necessary for survival. Is it permissible for companies to spend (hundreds of) millions of dollars making video games? Artists to spend significant chunks of time creating their works (written, pictorial, or whatever)? And so on.
Ergo, "this is a human right governments have no right to take away, why is this even a question?"
