According to Mills, freedom should only be restricted by what harms others. If this was a model we were to take with gay marriage, there are two arguments. The “marriage preservationist” would argue that allowing gay people to marry would harm the marriages of straight people. This act would devalue marriage to them and therefore be harming them. While the gay marriage activist would argue that not allowing gay people to marry is harming gay people because they aren’t able to put a legal label on their relationship and it restricts their freedoms. Probably more importantly in restricts legal rights that are given to married couples, such as visitation rights, tax benefits, insurance, and other legal matters that improve and simplify peoples lives. At least in regards to liberty allowing gay marriage harms far fewer people than prohibiting it especially considering that the “harm” that it causes doesn’t actually change or affect the people who oppose it. However, many people who oppose gay marriage support civil unions which give gays the same legal rights as married couples. Civil Unions essentially are marriages except for minor differences and terminology. This is probably the most equitable and therefore common solution in the near future.