No. It is not one or the other. Think about it for awhile. Things may be the fruit, the evidence, of a person’s freedom. That is not the same thing as defining WHY they choose what they chose or why they do what they do or who they intrinsically are.
I would define myself based on my Christianity, on my beliefs, on my family, etc... and nothing else. But my liberty is evidenced in the entire array of choices that I make, including my property. If my property can be taken by force, then some of my personal liberty has been taken by force.
Maybe the entire concept of ED is then wrong, and quibbles over when its qualifications are met are just that, quibbles that miss the point.
How about let’s get it banned by constitutional amendment then? Totally?