Of course, you are 98% ignorant of what I'm referring to. Go back to your TV and vegetate. Everything is just fine.
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.
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.
Well, according to the "Right Wing" WP your slippery slope has been greased. Took less than a week.
Ruling directly points to another clash in nations culture war
ANALYSIS
By David Von Drehle
THE WASHINGTON POST
WASHINGTON, June 27 The Supreme Court ruling to strike down the nations 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.
A_R