At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
I think there are more than one already; since our actions are free even though the retribution is decided. The goal, I believe, should be to acquire a state of a unified idea of freedom. At least this is what logic dictates. The post-modern 'meta' thinker might disagree.
In short, yes, freedom can have many meanings, and within the general meanings it can funcition.
However the answer can also be no beucase freedom isn't absolute. To have true freedom you would have to infringe on the rights of others. In society, we would say that the thief who is stealing food is wrong, even if he's starving and we would find a way to make sure he is not infringing on the shopkeepers right to sell and make a living. Some would take all rights away from the thief (prision) while others would let the thief have freedom, but try to rehibilitate him. This is a simplistic expination to why freedom is complicated.