I will probably be sorry I asked, but I must:
St. Steven
1

The point I was making is that individual liberty is where one affirms one’s own freedom and one’s own interests, while taking into consideration the freedom and interests of other pertinent or relative stakeholders.

By contrast, choice means ‘as long as the right person makes the decision, nothing else matters.’

One example:

Someone is going to get married, and there are potential obstacles, including economic woes and opposition from both sets of parents.

If someone weighs up the interests of all concerned, and still goes ahead and gets married, then they have got married on the grounds of individual liberty.

But if someone says “FUCK YOU, MUH CHOICE PLS!” as a futile act of teenage rebellion, then they have got married on the grounds of choice.

In both cases, the same decision was made. But the pro-individual liberty person has taken everyone’s interests and liberty into consideration, insofar as such factors may or may not be relevant. The choicer, on the other hand, doesn’t feel any need to do that, because they are an egotists, not a nihilist; instead of rational moral objectivists, they are purely subjective and emotive ‘reasoners’ and ‘deciders.’