The term "freedom" implies those natural limitations as part of its definition. "Absolute freedom" is a wholly different concept, namely omnipotence. There are degrees of use regarding slavery, but freedom is either ON or OFF with no gradation in-between. If you are free, no other will is unnaturally imposing a limitation upon the exercise of your own (within the inherent natural/moral limitations, of course).

There's no doubt that less slavery is moving toward freedom, so I get that this is a technical objection more than a practical one. But I feel compelled to note the distinction because we're in a minefield of deception whereby people are desensitized to slavery and it behooves us to get all five alarms blaring at the slightest presence of it.

Let no one be led to believe that a claim to freedom can be made while the smallest shred of coercion is present. If a solitary cent in taxation is demanded, a single permit required, the slightest slap on the wrist imposed for a moral action - you are not free.

Not basically free, not pretty much free, not free at all. Because if the tiniest opening is left in that door, miscreants will wedge a tank through it, and in a generation or two we'll be right back where we started.