Wait which proposition are you making? Clearly you are not claiming one or the other, or you would be breaking the law of the excluded middle. Lets then consider the middle.:
How can we have the freedom to do anything if we do not have the freedom to fail. If we do not have the option to be harmed, if we do not have the option to harm others, how then could we ever chose to be good? Please list any scenario in which God could stop something bad from happening to us without taking away our freedom to chose.
The problem with this argument is that you are forwarding that God is a parent to humanity in the same way that a mother is a parent to their child. The position of creator of the universe and humanity may hold certain moral implications that neither you nor I understand. But I will leave you with this, Does not even a Mother, after her child grows up, let her child forge his or her own path?
The bible refers to this alleged god as "father", and all over the place draws comparison to god being a parent type figure. Perhaps you need to go back and read those parts more carefully.
This last part here is a false analogy. A loving mother (or a loving father) would remove a roaring lion from the midst of her/his children immediately. Yet your alleged deity does not under your theology (aka - sorry your imaginary deity is not loving). But of course we would
in fact expect these kinds of vile writings from MEN (just like we see in Islam and hundreds of other cults through history).
Now, if this alleged 'god' thing holds "certain moral implications" (that you can't understand - and which are btw contrary to it's own rules) how have you then come to the determination that this thing is good? It could very well be that this being is the evil one and you are being tricked, especially since this would force you to accept that horrific acts of murder, rape, incest, or any any other disgusting or vile act could be deemed 'good' (aka moral) even when you find it repugnant. Sorry, to such things I call bullshit.
To the first argument, "freedom to fail" has absolutely nothing to do with allowing a hungry lion to eat your children in the backyard. You ask about a scenario in which this alleged god could save us from harm but not remove our freedom, as if you don't think this is possible. Have you read your bible? Numerous places are there in which this allegedly occurs (such as the parting of the red sea - they still had choice). An intervention from a deity has nothing to do with free choice (just look to your doctrine of Satan and the angels dude). They supposedly had direct access to this "God" and still rebelled. I'm sorry, freewill has nothing to do with this.