Answer:
Winthrop acknowledged that there are two types of freedom, Natural and Moral. He describes natural liberty as the freedom of a man to do whatever he pleases, as beasts would. He defines the "natural state" is corrupt and evil and that this form of liberty would not lead to a civilized society, instead man would become worse than savages within time. On the other hand, Moral liberty, also known as civil liberty, is a different kind of freedom focused to lead people to do what is good. Laws and rules under government and faith is what is needed in order to motivate the society to do the "right" things; without obeying laws to govern the people or faith with religion, the people would be corrupt and uncivilized. Religion was highly used in Winthrop's description, however, he used an analogy towards the status of women within the family. Basically he stated how the women must behave a certain way and obey rules under others and God to symbolize the man's good choice in marriage.
humans have their natural liberty at birth, but is moral liberty really freedom if you are under a certain order you have to follow? People do have the intention of doing the wrong or "evil" things as they encounter it, but the only way they know it is evil is because their surroundings and the "laws" tell them it is evil. But if there was no rules or laws, people would not be civilized, therefore we need it to be "free" from our sinfulness.
