Fire is fire, of course, even by any other name. And we must say the same about a philosophy. If the freeness of software is in anyway an objective right, then it need not be constrained by our choice of word for it. If "free software" does not fit under the umbrella of free, then we ought to find another name for it.
My new found critism on using the term "free software" comes from this Slashdot post.
He makes several good, if subtle points, that I really encourage everyone here to read.
After careful reading of that post, I realize that the only sense of "free" I ever associated with the free software movement was that the software was more free than proprietary software.
However, that free software allows collaborative software development, isn't necessarily an aspect of freedom. Yet this seems to be Stallman's primary motivation behind his efforts with GNU and the FSF. Rather than being free of restrictions or supposed oppression, Stallman wants to encourage people to help one another by primarily removing legislation that restricts this action.
Stallman makes a good point in this regard. His GNU Manifesto is quite explicit on how he uses the golden rule to eventually make his stark moral choice.
But how is this about freedom?