Replace Polygamy in your comment with marriage and see what happens:

Marriage is a deeply troublesome arrangement, with a storied history of abuse.

Yes, there is probably more abuse in marriages then outside, but this is not an argument against marriage, but against abuse.

"Polygamy will further the deterioration of society!" "Polygamy has a history of abuse!"

And where have we heard precisely these arguments before?

People are great.

You mean polyamory.

Polygamy is 1 man to multiple women. Polyamory is between more then two people of any gender or combination of genders.

Grand parent comment is talking about one man many women marriages as having higher rates of abuse, so your quibble here seems out of place.

But you're also wrong! Polygamy refers to any marriage that has more than two partners, gender identity is irrelevant.

One man many women is polygynyz one woman many men is polyandry. Polyamory is multiple partners.

In Europe in the modern era, the trend is more in the other direction: as society gains more respect for both men and women's choice of sexual self-determination, instead of being fixated on traditional opposite-sex, pair-courtship rituals, polyamorous relationships are becoming more accepted. They were once strongly disapproved of and even illegalized, but are now increasingly being seen as a legitimate personal choice. On the activist side, many (most?) LGBTQ organizations also include poly activists, especially the organizations which have a more left-wing flavor.

I think the more likely path than legal polygamy, though, is to expand a more flexible set of legal arrangements for families, as a replacement for traditional marriage being the legal framework. The fact that a huge proportion of couples here (Denmark) no longer get married is already forcing that for another reason. Since many families which otherwise look traditional — long-term cohabitation of an opposite-sex couple, jointly raising children of which they're parents, etc. — don't get married, marriage as the organizing principle of families is becoming less relevant, so the law already has to start handling things differently.

Same in Portugal. People I know are already doing alternative celebrations to regular marriage, influenced in part by the cost - since marriage celebrations are expected to have certain elements (catering, dresses, etc) which these celebrations do without.

"De facto unions" have existed (for both hetero and homosexual partners) for more than ten years already, and have many of the same rights as married couples, including inheritance, refusal do testify in court, etc.

Monogamy also has a storied history of abuse. Up until the 1970's it was perfectly legal for a man to rape his wife. This does not make it fundamentally impossible for healthy and consensual monogamous relationships to exist, and neither does the supposed behavior of 19th century Mormons make it impossible for healthy and consensual polygamous relationships to exist.

What behavior of 19th century Mormons are you referring to? The majority of polygamous relationships were about taking responsibility for widows and their families. Mormons were violently persecuted and polygamy was a support mechanism.

Yeah, I edited it to "supposed behavior" because I don't really have a good basis of knowledge about 19th century Mormons. It's just that, fairly or unfairly, they're usually the ones held up as an example of how polygamy is supposedly abusive and sexist.

> Polygamy is a deeply troublesome arrangement, with a storied history of abuse.

As is traditional marriage, but to a much larger extent.