Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Anima]

Indeed we can agree to this, if you are willing to do the following:
1.  Allow Iran to have unrestricted nuclear weapons.  
2.  Leave ISIS alone.
3.  Do not worry or bother anyone with global warming.

Let's do all of these things and wait 20 years to see what happens.  Essentially things will be the same for humanity as a whole.  So let's just agree to see how it turns out.

Otherwise, I expect to see admittance that we do not wait until the wheels fall off before we do something about things.

Marriage equality, the Iranian nuclear program, ISIS, and global warming.

That's some stunning reasoning, Anima. I'll bet you were the head of your special-ed class in forming and recognizing good analogies.

Stigmatizing special needs people now?  Wow!  Where is your empathy for those with special needs who are offended by your usage of their condition in a derogatory manner.  The same may be said for idiots and the stupid as well.  All such classes of person who deserve dignity and to not have their condition utilized in a derogatory manner just as those of same sex to not have someone referred to as gay in a derogatory way.

Indeed the argument is analogous.  The original post was stating we should and wait and see what will happen rather than jump to conclusions (an implicit argument of slippery slope).  To which I am saying the same logic is applicable in other situations as well.  

So rather than jumping to conclusions (and thus a slippery slope) let us wait and see what Iran will do with nuclear weapons, wait and see what ISIS will do in the middle east, and wait and see what global warming will do to the planet.  If things are essentially the same for the whole of humanity than each of these things were minor in the grand scheme and we were wise to leave them be.

We should not assume legalization of same sex marriage shall lead to Gaymaggedon any more than we should assume a nuclear Iran, ISIS, or global warming shall lead to Armageddon.  Otherwise we must say we take certain social and ethical actions to avoid potential harms before those harms manifest in actuality (and potentially become irreversible).  That is to say we are acting according to what many consider to be a slippery slope.

Thus it is reasonable for us to prohibit a nuclear Iran (they MAY attack Isreal), to prohibit ISIS (they MAY conquer the Middle East and begin attacking the west), and to try to stop global warming (that MAY cause biodiversity and environmental changes which will greatly harm our species), and same sex marraige (which MAY negatively impact our societies and populations).

So shall we act upon the MAY or not?  Or will I receive a hypocritical answer?