Does true love set someone free to do whatever they like?

Many assume freedom to mean that anything is permissible.
"If you love someone, set them free", the saying goes.
Does true love set someone free to do whatever they like,
or does it give them the freedom to seek and choose what is good?
The true meaning of our freedom is that we have the freedom
to choose what is good, and are not prevented from doing so.
Choosing evil actually does the opposite of making us free.
It enslaves us, whether to sin, to our passions,
to consequences of our acts, to addictions, etc.
Many states create laws that do not provide for a conscience clause.
If someone wants something, you must provide it,
else you are discriminating and are liable to prosecution.
Is this really respecting true freedom?
Do not true friends do their best to prevent their loved ones
from doing something harmful,
or do they facilitate their every action without question,
washing hands of all responsibility?
Am I discriminating against my friend,
when I advise him not to do something,
indeed refuse point-blank to get involved?
Is it not rather a sign to him to have a rethink,
that he may thank me for later?
Children thrive on boundaries. Adults are no different,
but many have lost sight of it.
There is a silent cry in the world today:
'Does nobody love me enough to stop me?'
There are those that do, and they may well end up, in court for it.
Truth is facing a new and stealthy persecution.
The problem with refusing to provide a conscience clause
is that one cannot remain separate from an act, when one facilitates it.
Even state law recognises and punishes accessories to crime,
so the state should recognise that if a person assists in something,
they become liable for it, and provide the right to refuse,
without prejudice to persons, to facilitate the acts they wish to do.
Respect for freedom must extend to all.
Why prosecute someone for refusing to assist in something that
is against their conscience? If they really want to,
they can find someone else to help them.
If they can't, then maybe it's a sign for them to have a rethink.
Maybe enough witnesses will bring about a change of mind and heart.
Pope Benedict was right to call relativism a 'dictatorship.
"Dictators suppress the rights of certain individuals over others,
in the illusory name of the 'common good."
In the dictatorship of relativism, objective truth is the enemy,
and people, enslaved by their choices, are ultimately the victims.
"There is no right and wrong" says relativism,
"there is only what is true for you!"
And this is the best that the 'Age of Reason' could come up with?
True independence, true freedom, can only be found
by depending on Truth,
and truth does not change, even as human thinking changes.
"When you will know the truth, the truth will set you free." (Jn 8:31-2)