The problem, of course, is that with respect to actions that are physically possible, people ARE free to do as they wish -- so long as they're willing to deal with the consequences of whatever it is that they want to do. Which reveals that there's a hidden element to the common notion of freedom. Rephrased, one might say that what people really mean by freedom is "the extent to which a person is able to do as he or she wishes WITHOUT A CONSEQUENCE TO HIM OR HERSELF WHICH THEY WOULD PERCEIVE AS UNDESIRABLE".
Stated in this form, the constraints which lie at the heart of freedom are made clearer. Given that there are multiple actors with possibly conflicting desires, freedom in one individual is in potential opposition to freedom in others. And, in the absence of an outside constraining force, the extent of one's freedom is the extent of one's ability to bring about their their wishes, whether or not their wishes are opposed.
Said another way, when discussing freedom we must always be clear about whose freedom we are discussing, to what end that freedom is directed, and who opposes it.
It's also clear that there is a very close association between freedom and desire. That is, freedom is always the ability to do or not do according to one's desire without external constraint or restraint. An implication of this is that if everyone desired possible and consistent end goals, then there would be maximum freedom. The converse of this is that if many actors desire inconsistent goals, then the factor that will equilibrate between the actors is the ability of each to impose their desires against the wishes of others.
Finally, in considering freedom, we must recall that God is the only truly free Being, in that he does whatever He wishes and none can impose their will on Him. The freedom of all others to do as they wish is contingent upon the extent to which what they wish is within the scope of God's Will.
Putting all this together, we see that the only way in which freedom can truly be maximized is for all to know God and to seek to do His Will. In every other case, "freedom" inevitably becomes the rule of the strong. Or, said another way, freedom for one is often bondage for another.
So, in light of all this, in what sense is a country, such as the United States, free? A country is only free to the extent that it is is governed in accordance with the revealed (as opposed to the decretive -- see below) Will of God. And, a consequence of this is that the further a nation strays from this foundation, the more subject to the will of the strong it will become, and the less free it will be.
A technical note on the above -- it is important to emphasize that the revealed Will of God can vary from the decretive Will of God. That is, sometimes God decrees that certain things will happen which are not, in and of themselves, according to His revealed Will -- but because those things serve a higher and more important purpose in what He has Willed. The best example of this is the death of Jesus -- an act which was the ultimate in evil, but which God decreed because it would result in ultimate good.
But the part of God's Will to which we have responsibility is his revealed, as opposed to his decretive Will.
And the salient point here is that a nation is only free to the extent that it is governed in accordance with the revealed Will of God.
Father God, have mercy upon us.
