Marty got a point.
The issue is not really the sanctioning per se… The issue is government can effectively tell women don’t choose Bob, choose Charlie instead. In US, that’s what government do if Charlie is single. In muslim countries that’s what government would do if Charlie is muslim.
Imagine if government has power to tell customers don’t buy iPhone, buy Samsung instead? Apple and Samsung won’t bother doing R&D to build better phones. They just bribe government official. The same way men don’t bother offering best offers for women. They just pay religious leaders, and feminazis to rule in their favor. Many hot babes are then underpaid.
However, once government has power to sanction and define who is barber, psychologists, etc. government will have that power to effectively alter consumer behaviors. Better barbers that don’t pay up bribe will be declared to be non barber, for example.
It’s probably not clearly seen in barber or programmer. It is indeed clearly seen in marriage.
Even if government can sanction marriage, it’ll be tolerable if all commercial sex outside marriage have the same status as marriage. It’s not. It’s just not the way government work.
Why Government Shouldn’t Have Power to Define Marriage? is a post from: Free Market Forever
Incoming search terms:
- powered by phpBB best performing arts college (14)
