psyco: To explain the universal issue we are often referring to a teacher and his/her students.
I recall that they explained it this way: a young man, living in his parents' home, decides that he can make its own rules and live as he pleases. His parents explain that, if he wishes to do so, he should also go out into the world and make it on his own. Otherwise, he is using their resources and protection while shirking any responsibilities or discipline (ie, enjoying the benefits while others pay for it).
I can see the point you are making- the parable would imply that humanity wanted to show it could rule itself just fine, but God changed the parameters. So that seems unfair. But God could just as well say that His rulership comes with specific benefits (perfection, access to long life, a world that cooperates, etc), and even without those, humanity was using His resources (including the breath of life) to govern themselves 'without' Him.
And I guess this is also a point in His favor (sort of): If He couldn't make it work while giving humanity so many advantages, what chance did they have? Of course, there is a possible alternative- God decides to work with humanity to find a sort of behavioral sweet spot. The insistence that everything was perfect as-is not only was demonstrably wrong, but kept Him from making changes that might have made for a better world.