How reliable is this assertion?

No one has ever actually explained why it is a fallacy. They just call it a fallacy.

Serbia didn't start world war 1

>and if you say what this user says you'd be saying it happens all the time
I never said it happens all the time though, did I? It is very common though and is another name for a class of manipulative behaviors generally...e.g. the "food-in-the-door" strategy. It's also how pedophiles groom their victims. They don't just grab and assrape them; they slowing condition them to accept certain things as normal, which lead to more things, etc.

OK

sarajevo isn't in Serbia

>Do you guys think the slippery slope idea is holding up in this day and age?
Slippery slope turns out to be true in many cases. take the example used- gay marriage- used in your Pic. Marriage exists to create a family i.e. raise children. Its not about love really, so when gay people get married its about a legal contract- so it follows that eventually people will marry their parents or cars becasue its just a contract. right?

Slippery slope fallacy is only a fallacy in some cases, it applies where an event A is hyperbolically unrelated to some other event C such as the example given in the pic. Slippery slope implies some slow slipping runaway to an increasingly fast break-down of order. In a case where event A (such as gay marriage) is tied to some other event B (wanting to adopting children), this is not an example of slippery slope fallacy but rather a slow march.

Go back 100 years and if you even suggested pedophilia was acceptable, the townspeople would come and either run you out of town or hang you from a tree. The fact that they can actually be so bold as to molest a child and not fear being immediately strangled in prison with their own intestines is the slippery slope in action. We let faggots be faggots cause we ignored where faggots come from, and now we've got Fagtopia where every leatherclad degenerate can agitate for further access to your kids to teach them their degenerate ways and they are actively shielded from being killed in the street.

We now live in a world where an HIV faggot can have his lifesaving medicine payed for by you because he can't stop taking it up the shitter every weekend, but if I won't take a worthless jab of jewjuice I can't have a job.

It's not a fallacy like redditfags always dismiss it as. There is absolutely an idea of precedence and normalization. You push the envelope, something that becomes fringe becomes normal, and things that were even further beyond the fringe become less taboo as well. It's how we went from "well if two consenting adults want to shove things up each others HIV-infested colons in the privacy of their own bedroom, then I guess that's fine" to "you're a bigot if you don't allow us to inundate your impressionable 5 year old child with propaganda about how he's a girl trapped in a boy's body and needs to have his dick chopped off ASAP"

Slippery slope is literally just cause and effect.
Whoever came up with this as a fallacy is a kike

Why should we ban marrying their parents, monkeys or cars?

It seems like their argument is a straw man

are you retarded lol? what does that have to do within anything I said, a Serb shot him and Serbia is blamed for starting the war which isn't true, the assassination could have happened anywhere else in the AHE but it just so happen to be there, also serbs were a majority in Sarajevo at the time.

People claim it's a fallacy because the person making the argument doesn't always explicitly make a logical connection between A and Z. In the example from the OP pic, Colin doesn't explicitly draw a logical connection between allowing gay marriage and allowing people to marry their cars. But usually the logical connection between A and Z is pretty obvious and doesn't need to be expressly stated. For the OP example, if you wrote out the explanation it would be something like:
>Allowing homosexual marriage would seriously alter the traditional definition of "marriage" in a way that makes the institution completely unrecognizable. If we accept the premise that marriage can be redefined in this instance, people will probably argue in the future that it should be redefined in even more extreme ways, since the precedent will have been set that it's not a fixed institution.
This kind of argument is typically left unstated because it's obvious on its face to anyone discussing the topic in good faith. Bad-faith actors will charge you with making a "slippery slope" argument to avoid acknowledging the logical consequences of their position.
>Redditors and other worthless people use it to discount your legitimate concerns
Basically this.

The implications here are no one can get married unless youre an old christian man and a female child.

Ignore the choir boys being fucked though.

>are you retarded lol?
nah, I just wanted to make you sperg out and it worked

Half of those things are bullshit reddit buzzwords meant to make people sound smart in an argument

Not. This is the only one thats doesnt belong there. It litrally just says cause and effect is illogical.

>haha I was just pretending to be retarded!!

Slippery slopes exist. It's a fallacy to insist that they don't.

See Douglas Walton's book.

>whoah there fella, that argument is a slippery slope!
>did you just strawman me?
>you gotta use occams razor, think!
>bro stop gaslighting me
>

Attached: 1597955808315.png (469x452, 276.68K)

It's a sort of strawman, wherein you dismiss the matter at hand because of something it might lead to. So you're more attacking the second one than the first one.
To avoid the fallacy you need to substantiate the steps between, and what the likelihood of each of these happening is. Which is quite difficult.
Most of the time it's done in bad faith so the opposition does not have to address the consequences of their beliefs.

Not inherently a fallacy, neither formal nor informal. It can be if the logical chain doesn't make sense, intuitively or otherwise. Normally slippery slopes follow a quite good logic train, but they are still an hypothetical based on an analysis of existing data

Faggots reproduce by touching kids.

yes the fags said 'we just want to hold hands' now they want to take over all of society and turn all the kids gay.
give an inch they take a mile.

Sexual deviants and niggers should have NEVER been given anything, now both groups want supremacy in our society.