Re: What good is polygamy? Questions and accusations we get/
Interesting discussion!
I think I know what may be going on here. It's all about what the accepted norms are, "the usual rules". Most communities and societies can accept a certain amount of straying from the rules, a certain level of departure from the accepted norms. After all, when you stray from the rules, you affirm those rules by the very act of failing to adhere to them, if you follow my logic.
So for example, in a monogamy-only society, a few people here and there may cheat on their spouses, but it is still a monogamous society. But when the norms themselves are challenged, when a group of people are playing by a different set of rules entirely, well that's quite another matter. That's a lot scarier for people. You tend to get some very visceral reactions.
It's a bit like a group of friends who agree to meet up in the local park, to play baseball. So they do that, and have a good time. One or two may bend the rules now and then, but they're still playing baseball. But if a small group of them were top say "Quite frankly, we'd rather play cricket, that wonderful English game. We're going to play that. " Then it's: "Hey, wait a minute! What's all this about cricket! I thought we agreed to play baseball! Don't you guys understand what we're doing here?"
So, you can bend the rules, or even break them from time to time--there'll always be a certain amount of that going on, human nature being what it is--but if you start playing a completely different game, then you going to get a reaction.
To put it another way, it depends on what "role" you're seen to be playing, on "Life's great stage". We don't judge all people the same way. For example, when people learn that Mick Jagger (the Rolling Stone lead singer) has children by various women, no-one lifts an eyebrow. He's a Stone! Of course he has children by various women. It would be a scandal if he didn't! But if your local pastor--or politician for that matter--were found in the same position, well, you can imagine the next morning's newspapers.
Similarly, an artist or poet could be openly polygamous (many have been) and this would be accepted, but the same rules don't normally apply to Christians. Different role, different game. Different expectations.
What the solution is for you guys, I really can't imagine, given that Christianity has been playing the monogamy-only game for quite a long time now.
Here's an abstract of a paper, which presents an interesting historical perspective (found via Google Scholar):
http://gradworks.umi.com/MR/44/MR44008.html
The perception of polygamy in early modern England
by Loughead, Lisa Shirley, M.A., DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY , 2008, 158 pages; MR44008
Abstract:
Monogamy is a distinctive aspect of the Christian tradition. Polygamy existed in most ancient societies, but Christian authorities opposed the practice, in part to distinguish monogamous Christianity from other faiths. By the early modern period, polygamy was rare in Christian Europe, and it had gained a negative reputation because of its association with sexual excess and lust. During the Reformation, however, certain individuals, including Luther himself, condoned polygamy, and Lutheran doctrine was compatible with plural marriage in some ways. After an ill-fated attempt to establish a polygamous community at Muenster, however, it became much more difficult to support polygamy, as the practice was further tainted by association with religious radicalism and lustful, degenerate behavior. During the English Revolution, the downfall of censorship and the tumultuous political climate allowed some English authors to write in support of plural marriage, using both practical and religious arguments. Yet, the majority of authors condemned the practice. Plural marriage continued to be associated with pagan and barbaric culture, and accusations of polygamy were used to undermine and discredit one's enemies. In the literature of travel and colonisation, accusations of polygamy were used to demean and vilify peoples such as Jews and Turks. The existence of polygamy in Europe's colonies helped Christian Europeans to maintain a sense of superiority over the pagan, barbaric indigenous inhabitants and helped to establish a shared European and Christian identity. In the writings of the Reformation and the Revolution, along with the literature of travel and colonisation, polygamy became a boundary marker between Christians and non-Christians, Catholics and Protestants, radicals and non-radicals, civilised countries and barbaric countries, and England and its colonies. Polygamy's function as a boundary marker, more than any theological reasons, was the reason why plural marriage did not gain significant support in early modern England.---
Ryenwine
. 
