This is one of few words in the Western world that has an automatic negative connotation affixed to it. Like many things in the West, this is wrong. Opponents in Western culture will point to a single instance of abuse, and make the entire genre illegal, simply because it offends their sensibilities. It doesn't matter that hardly any documented cases of abuse actually exist.
First, what is abuse? Christian opponents label the lifestyle itself as abusive. Feminists label the women's roles as abuse. Scientists? For years we've tried to reveal the truth, with typically limited success given the venom and hate directed at any person who dares to speak truthfully. Abuse is violence, psychological trauma, and physical damage. That's all. There is no damage from simply being different, ethnic, or non-Western.
Second, what is polygamy? What Western people know of it is limited to twisted stories repeated blindly by a media that can't think. Scientists think. Journalists print what they're paid to print. Never forget that newspapers are owned and controlled, while scientists are largely free to do what they want. Polygamy is defined simply as multiple marriages, including those who live together as though they are in a group marriage.
What's so bad about that? Nothing, really. What are the facts? Well, for most of human history we've lived a tribal lifestyle. Tribal is very close to full polygamy, yet apart from general repression and murder by ruling nations, tribes themselves are peaceful, happy, and polygamous. Most people in the 'bible' were married to multiple spouses, so that even if one only reads the bible, it's insane to decry the practice wholesale. Insane, and hypocritical.
In fact, up until the 12th century, nobody in any nation would raise an eyebrow if someone they knew or met had multiple spouses. It meant you were doing well as a family. Only poor, struggling, and somewhat crazy people were restricting themselves to a small family with only a single spouse. In agricultural and tribal life, again, polygamy comes naturally. A large family is more likely to survive, and be successful. Christians were not able to ruin it for the world until the iron age.
With the rise of corporations, Christians were for the first time in history able to control multiple nations, sidestep laws, and grow in power. It's not surprising that laws against "indecency, obscenity, nudity, paganism, marriages," and all manner of other non-christian ideals went into place worldwide. By the 1600s the world was just starting to recover from the Christian dark ages where the religion had attempted to control all the major governments directly. Companies arose to build the tall buildings, big ships, and weapons of war. Christians found that their maniacal and obsessive natures fit well with company structures.
Nearly all corporations that I've read about were Christian initially, from the slaving ships of Columbus, to the fleet that forced Japan to "open trade", to the ships that "took" Hawaii, and right up to the invasion of Palestine in 1948 by the United States. Occupying British forces who'd used the nation during WW2 for defense, turned on the Palestinians and struck a deal to hand over control that they'd assumed to a newly formed 'nation', Israel. To get the world to go along with this, the fraud that Israel had been a nation "before" was promoted by worldwide media. They were simply 'taking back what was theirs all along.'
The muslim practice of polygamy has always been peaceful, and only suppressed, religiously dominated, and isolated nations have harmful practices. Iran was a peaceful modern nation until the United States moved in and promoted the overthrow of a peaceful [nonchristian] nation to establish a Christian rule. It failed, and muslim extremists took power. That's the track record of Christian interference, and that's why the world is in such a mess today. 400 years of corporate christian-driven manipulation of nations and people have not brought us peace.
If they'd at least been successful, we would have world peace. That could potentially be justified despite the bloody christian methods of sterilization, genocide, and ethnic cleansing. It was the highest irony that Milosevic was charged in a Christian court for cleansing when he was defending against an army that used cluster bombs with incendiaries and phosphorus on civilians. When he threatened to subpoena witnesses to that effect, he suddenly died while in custody despite being in good health prior to his defense.
Polygamy is harmless, just like monogamy is harmless, right? Wait. You're not going to like this, so sit down.
Monogamy is not harmless. The enforced practice of one-spouse is directly linked to poverty in economics. Economics is a science. It requires math to understand it. Economics can be explained in simple terms however, and it's obvious that 3 husbands can support 3 wives, but not obvious that 3 husbands married together can support upwards of 21 wives and hundreds of children! Financially, polygamy is more sound than monogamy.
Monogamy is also not nonviolent. Divorce increases in any nation that legislates marriage to regulate divorce and prohibit polygamy. Violence generally rises as a result. Nations that HAD NO VIOLENCE [Native Americans, Brazilians, etc] did not become known for domestic violence problems until feds stopped them from performing polygamy marriages. America, Ireland, England, and other long-term Westernized nations have MORE domestic violence than many third world nations!
Monogamy is not less repressive of women, but more oppressive. In America more women report that they are denied rights to vote, to work, and to own property than in any other Westernized industrial age nation. It's worse here, not better, for women. American women should marry Northern Europeans, Asian, or African mates if they are concerned about gender equity. In just ONE day, September 15, 2009; 65,321 people were given domestic violence relief services in the United States of America.
Although one can argue numbers all day long, and there is no lie told that is worse than statistics, the science is real and undeniable. Flat-earther's aside, it's easy to see. Debate the percentages, but by engaging in that debate you are admitting that the evidence clearly does NOT show monogamy to be in any way superior.
The UN has most of the sources I'm drawing from, and the rest come from America's own Census data. Scientists look at the sources, the data, and no more serious complaint can come from anyone but the self. When America itself admits to a drug problem, that's a fact by admission, and not a point of debate. When a woman confesses to a murder, the admission is accepted by most thinking adults as proof of guilt.
Scientists however say no, that's not enough. She may be depressed, or coerced while in confinement, we must prove it externally. Science is all about reproducing results, or gaining multiple external proofs when something can't be repeated. Thus, I look not just at what America admits to in her own legal publications, but what other nations and agencies say about America. Amnesty International and the United Nations are pretty clear on these facts too, they see and state that America has drug and domestic violence problems. Thus, it's a reality.
"America" refers to the United States of America, the only nation so named.
I am a graduate student of Physics and Mathematics, as well as Software Engineering.
The United Nations
The US Census