> I don't like it because it suggests that freedom and security are somehow at odds with each other, which is already an authoritarian framing of the situation, and really just nonsense.

Agreed. I think part of the issue stems from how people define freedom, seemingly thinking that freedom means "no rules".

For example: If having rules is intrinsically against freedom, then why would anyone who desires freedom play sports, where rules define the game. If you eliminate the rules, you eliminate the game and your freedom to actually be able to play it.