When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage in Obergefell v Hodges, the dissenting judges asked what was next on the slippery slope into immorality. One of their primary concerns was polygamy.
Justice Alito posed this question to one of the petitioners:
Suppose we rule in your favor in this case, and then after that a group consisting of two men and two women apply for a marriage license. Would there be any ground for denying them a license?
Chief Justice Roberts in his dissent wrote,
Although the majority randomly inserts the adjective `two' in various places, it offers no reason at all why the two-person element of the core definition of marriage may be preserved while the man-woman element may not.
The left accused them of using "slippery-slope" arguments and yelling "the sky is falling."
And yet, a New York judge has just ruled in favor of a polyamorous relationship in regards to rent control, using Obergefell as precedent, and even amazingly citing Judge Roberts's dissent as part of his rationale.
The case of West 49th St., LLC v. O'Neill involved three men: Scott Anderson, Robert Romano, and Markyus O'Neill. Anderson and Romano were legally married but living apart. O'Neill and Anderson lived together in an apartment. All three were in a relationship together. Anderson died, and O'Neill wanted to keep the apartment at the same rent from Anderson's lease according to New York's rent control policies, which was pretty good – just $1,048 per month in New York City.
Of course, the landlord wanted to raise the rent.
In the end, the judge ruled in favor of the throuple (no, I'm not making that word up).
I guess that means we're one step closer to fulfilling this Bee prophecy:
So, polygamy gets a win in the courts, which makes one wonder what were some of the other slippery-slope arguments that were made against gay marriage?
Let's try pedophilia:
Beastiality:
Incest:
Not here's the thing that's worth saying about logical fallacies like the slippery-slope argument: just because it's not an acceptable rhetorical device in debate club, doesn't mean the slippery slope isn't true.
The fact is that all of these bizarre sexual things have been happening for millennia; there are laws against most of them in the Bible, which means they are part of the fallen human condition. In fact one could say they are our natural sinful state, and without a supernatural intervention, we are assuredly on a slippery-slope into ever worse depravity.
With that said, the top of the slippery slope was not Obergefell; the slippery slope started when some dunce in a garden ate a piece of fruit he wasn't supposed to, and the only way off this ride is by clinging desperately to Christ.
If our country won't do that, then it shouldn't be surprising when things go downhill.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
