For example, before gay marriage was legalised I heard people claim legalising gay marriage was a slippery slope to allowing paedophilia and bestiality. This has not proved to be the case in reality.
Opponents of slippery slopes like to make the assumption the slope is steeper than what the original author may have had in mind. And so because we don’t find ourselves slipping down the slope fast enough, they declare the original argument bunk.
For example, in your argument about gay marriage, we haven’t accepted pedophilia and bestiality yet. But how long has gay marriage been legalized? What if the slope to pedophilia is 50 years long? We don’t know if in the future the stigma of being a “minor attracted person” will have worn off and people will be permitted to marry whoever or whatever they want without restrictions. Indeed, if someone will be happy marrying a dog because they have no faith in dating culture in the year 2060, why stop them? There is precedent for expanding the definition of marriage. What is the harm, especially as marriage grows increasingly meaningless and only provides an economic benefit?
So yea I hate slippery slopes. They are easily misrepresented.
It is, of course, not actually used in this manner typically; but, it is probably important to remember that not all things push to absurdity I guess.
Historically, they might have, but we decided barbers shouldn't be healthcare providers and now we have a shortage of healthcare providers.
This literally happened until the government eventually stepped in to regulate it.
The slippery slope is a real thing. Entropy is real. It takes work to maintain moral behavior.
Edit: some weirdo is going through my post history claiming this is phobic of something. What a weirdo.