> If icon_link_to is useful, then shouldn't it be included with this pull-request as well? 

No, especially not in this pull-request. I don't like writing shared libraries until I've used them on at least 3 projects. I'd want to experiment in my own projects for a while against these new `fa_icon` helpers first. The two helpers proposed in this PR are directly tied to FontAwesome interactions and little else. 

> But then you start going down a slippery slope of adding tons of helpers that may or may not be to the liking of many of the developers who use this gem.

Agreed on the slippery slope, but not because I care whether developers use these helpers. No one is forcing developers to use them. I think the slippery slope is with writing wrappers for all the possible built-in rails helpers that might possibly benefit from an `icon` option.

> I think this pull request should be packaged into a separate gem called font-awesome-rails-helpers. Developers who want helpers could include font-awesome-rails-helpers. Developers who want minimalist FontAwesome can include font-awesome-rails. 

That feels a little overkill to me considering it's only two exposed methods so far. Again, no one is forcing anyone to use these methods. 

I think this kind of minimalism is overrated. As long as the helper methods introduced here do not conflict with anything, I think they're a win, because I think a majority of users can and will benefit from them. I think it's beneficial to have the base icon helpers autoloaded by default, but I would gladly concede to having an easy way to turn the autoloading capability of the helpers off for those that don't want them in the namespace (or in memory).