Thought I would finish up with this.
When you are free of coercive force against you, you are free.
If we hold freedom as a moral good, then it also holds that you cannot coerce others, or you would be violating the principle behind your own freedom to do so. It is logically inconsistent to believe in a right to freedom, and then commit aggression.
Freedom is very simple.I understand, not would I expect you to. The reason I bring up differing definitions of freedom is that I believe that to be the most complete definition of freedom that I have ever come across in that there is nothing more to add. Other definitions of freedom encompass less.
When you are free of coercive force against you, you are free.
If we hold freedom as a moral good, then it also holds that you cannot coerce others, or you would be violating the principle behind your own freedom to do so. It is logically inconsistent to believe in a right to freedom, and then commit aggression.