Free Will is better than forced will

My opponent has made 8 points in favor of his resolution. As my opponent made the resolution and as the resolution is a blanket statement, my opponent must defeat my logical syllogism or admit defeat. My opponent also has the burden of proof. For my opponents resolution to be correct, Forced Will must be better than forced will in all circumstances as my opponent never defined a specific circumstance. As it is clear: being forced to do bad things is not better than having the option to choose not to do them. Therefore his resolution is negated. However I will rebut his points below as well. 1. If there was forced will by the "right people" there would not be any suffering. Disease, accidents, starvation, and depression would all exist. 2. We have failed God I disagree and apparently God does as well as he told me yesterday that he thinks I have not failed him. 3. A poorly constructed analogy about driving a car Free Will =/= No one driving the car. Free Will = You driving the car. Let me reconstruct your analogy correctly. Forced Will is like someone driving you somewhere you don't want to go because it will be better for you in their opinion. Forced Will I would drive a fat person to a gym and they would be screaming along the way, crying, suffering and begging not to go. I would be laughing maniacally and shouting that it will make them healthier. I would put a gun to their head and tell them to lift weights or I would make them do it by force. As they slid into bed they would be sore and tired and would be miserable the next two weeks because their body would ache and they would suffer physically all the while dreading the next forced jog where I would tie them to the back of my car and make them run 10 miles. They would only be allowed to eat healthy foods. Free Will The fat person would be driving the car and would drive to McDonalds to get a burger and they would be happy and not suffering while they ate the burger. Down the line they might die earlier, but they wouldn't be sad because they happen to be a Mormon and would be going to heaven. 4.We cannot comprehend what is right and what is wrong. This negates your entire argument because then from our perspective being forced to do the "right" thing wouldn't be better in our perception because we wouldn't be able to tell that we were doing better things in comparison due to our failure to comprehend what is right and what is wrong. 5. We have robots and robots do not complain therefore we should be robots Likening humans to machines is not likely to prove your point and this logically makes no sense as we are not robots and would complain if forced to do something we don't want to do. 6. We have government thus to have the idea everyone being mind controlled being a possibility this will somehow ease the tensions between being governed and another unnamed extreme (possibly anarchy) I do not understand this or how it pertains to the argument. Red Herring. 7. There is no hope. I have hope, therefore hope exists. 8. Without mind control there can be no order. Order exists today and mind control does not exist therefore this is negated. I have negated all of my opponents arguments and still have my logically constructed syllogism above that clearly disproves my opponents vague resolution.