The gay marriage debate in this country, (like so many others) wouldn't be a debate at all if the interference of the state was removed. Just as countless Americans chose to either patron or boycott Chic-fil-A this week, individuals should have the freedom to form contracts, (be they for marriage or otherwise) with whomever they wish and call it whatever they like. My latest article discusses this issue further.
The issue being discussed should not be one of determining whose views win out and which politicians get to decide, but why politicians are given such power in the first place. While countless Americans stormed into Chic-fil-A restaurants this week to demonstrate their support for Dan Cathy’s First Amendment rights (and certainly some because they also disagree with the concept of gay marriage), many across the country have taken it upon themselves to boycott the company for similar reasons. By doing so, millions of Americans on both sides of the debate have unwittingly exhibited the greatest evidence that there should be no debate at all in terms of public policy: the operation of the market of ideas.