[toothless]

Only fools fail to see a slippery slope falacy. Fool.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html

[Polycarp]

Of course, you are right. Lawrence wasn't a point on the trajectory of the slippery slope of Roe. Roe was not a point on the trajectory of the slippery slope of Griswold Vs Connecticut. Griswold Vs Connecticut was not a point on the trajectory of the slippery slope of the 1930 Lambeth Conference. The 1930 Lambeth Conference decision was not a point on the trajectory of the slippery slope of the Reformation. Ad nauseum.

Of course, you are 98% ignorant of what I'm referring to. Go back to your TV and vegetate. Everything is just fine.

[Kevin Curry]

Toothless is witless--a BIG cavity in the cranium. It will require a dentist with a scoop shovel and a small cement mixer to fill it.

I'll bet you're a barely-post-adolescent ersatz South Park conservative--no children, no real responsibility other than stuffing yourself with the thrill of the day.

[Reactionary]

It's spelled "fallacy." Fool.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question.

There is nothing fallacious in discussing the likely outcomes of an action or proposition. The fallacy you refer to is only applicable if no reasoning or evidence is presented to justify the connection. In this case, the author has laid out a fairly solid argument in favor of these likely outcomes using similar legal precedents. If you find fault with them, that is where you should make your case . To simply label this proposition as a "Slippery Slope Fallacy" and attempt to mandate that all likely consequences be ignored is not merely a fallacious reason in and of itself, but an even more pronounced failure of logic.

[arkady_renko]

Only fools fail to see a slippery slope falacy. Fool.

Well, according to the "Right Wing" WP your slippery slope has been greased. Took less than a week.

Debate on marriage and more looms

Ruling directly points to another clash in nation’s culture war

ANALYSIS
By David Von Drehle
THE WASHINGTON POST

WASHINGTON, June 27 — The Supreme Court ruling to strike down the nation’s anti-sodomy laws combined two of the most contentious issues on the political landscape by grounding the liberty of gays in the same legal turf that sustains the right to abortion — and it directly points to yet another clash in the culture war: a fight over gay marriage.

Full article here

A_R