Natural evil and original sin

On the face of it, the freewill defense can only account for moral evils, not natural evils. Natural processes aren't personal agents. 

There are a couple of ways freewill theists try to deflect that objection. They may say a stable environment is necessary to make decisions with predictable consequences. Predictability is an important component of moral and rational deliberation. 

One objection to that response is that orthodox freewill theists make allowance for some degree of divine intervention in the natural order (e.g. miracles, answered prayer). Sometimes God does override the automatic setting. But if that's consistent with a stable environment, then they can't invoke the uniformity of nature as a necessary condition of free choice. They permit many exceptions. 

Another response is to invoke the Fall. On this view, Adam's sin made humans liable to death by a variety of natural causes.

But is that appeal consistent with freewill theism? According to libertarianism, human agents are the ultimate source of their own choices. That's prerequisite for moral responsibility.

Suppose a families dies in a natural disaster because it was at the wrong place at the wrong time through no fault of its own. How does appealing to Adam's sin justify their death by natural disaster? How can Adam's sin be the ultimate reason for their vulnerability when libertarianism requires each human agent to be the ultimate source of his own choices? 

This is less of a problem in Calvinism, because Calvinism is less individualistic. In federal theology, a representative individual may act on behalf of others, for good or ill. Of course, some people think that's unfair, but my immediate point is that appealing to Adam's sin to justify death by natural causes would be internally consistent with Calvinism, whereas it seems to be internally inconsistent with freewill theism. 

One can still try to attack federal theology, but you have to attack it from the outside by showing how it conflicts with some external standard. And, of course, you have to defend your external standard.