Back when our country was still debating whether or not we should change the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, those opposed to the redefinition argued that if we did so, polygamy and polyamory would be next. Opponents argued that this was a crazy slippery slope fallacy. But it wasn’t. It was a valid slippery slope argument. Conservatives were simply noting that the rationale for redefining marriage to include same-sex couples applied equally to all sorts of other relationships, including polygamy and polyamory. If you include same-sex couples, there is no rational basis on which to exclude polygamy. The idea that marriage should be limited to just two people is based on the sex binary. Once the sex binary is replaced with a simple requirement of “love and commitment,” polygamous and polyamorous relationships qualify for marriage as well.

Well, it didn’t take long for us to start sliding down the slope. A New York City eviction court judge, Karen May Bacdayan, has ruled that a polyamorous throuple is entitled to the same legal protections as two-person marital unions. What’s even more amazing is the fact that they don’t even need to be legally married to be entitled to the same benefits as married partners. So not only does this decision abolish the two-person requirement for marriage, but it also abolishes the legal requirement of marriage to be entitled to marriage benefits. Apparently, any group of people who want to have a relationship together are immediately given the benefits of marriage by the State the minute the relationship is formed. This is moral, legal, and practical insanity.

This case has limited applicability, but it sets a legal precedent for extending marriage to polygamous and polyamorous relationships, just as we predicted.