I am not talking about freedom FROM things, but freedom that enables people to make choices.
That line, right there, is the turd in this punchbowl.
It's a good thing to discuss the nature of freedom. The political philosophers whose ideas are the basis of pretty much any sort of political arrangement you can think of, break freedom (liberty) into two categories - negative liberties and positive liberties.
Negative liberties are the things you are free from(or would like to be free from). Such as, freedom from religious persecution, freedom from unwarranted arrest and/or detainment, freedom from excessive taxation, freedom from burdensome regulation, etc.
Positive liberties are the things you are free to do or have. However, it isn't as simple as "You're free to have a gun if you so choose" or "You're free to marry a goat of the same gender as yourself" - these are negative liberties, as the liberties in question do not provide you with anything, but merely withdraw limitations. Positive liberties are provisions for material goods and services - the freedom to have a gun given to you, the freedom to have your same-sex bestial wedding service provided at no charge, etc.
Obviously, negative liberties are more often associated with Locke, Hume, de Tocqueville, and the like - the guys our founding fathers boned up on when they thought up our nation's government, and their ideological descendants.
Just as obviously, positive liberties are most strongly associated with Marx and Engels, Freud, etc. (And no offense Frank, as I know you're something of a fan of Freud, but he was absolutely a pinko dirtbag.)
The Straight Story's aforementioned turd turned what could have possibly been an interesting conversation to watch into another commie circle-jerk.
