This is just a guess but I believe what alot of people's problem with it is they view it as a form of adultery. Little do they know that polygomy was a very common practice in the old testament times and in many cultures in the world today it is acceptable to have multiple wives. Personally I would never want to have multiple wives however if someone chooses to live a polygomist lifestyle I don't think it really should be anyone elses concern.

yah, we SAY seperation of church and state, but if you really think about it, how many government and christian things are related.

The reasoning is that it is immoral. Not that I am saying I agree necessarily, just that it is the reasoning.

I would say it's mostly a matter of cultural conditioning. A large part of our cultural conditioning IS connected with religion, specifically the Christian tradition, where polygamy is generally vilified. Even if you take away the Christianity, the habits of thinking, the entrenched viewpoint... remains. It's sort of like when you move a lamp from one table to the next, it can be a long time before you stop reaching for the no-longer-present lamp. Really, much of our thinking and beliefs are just that: conditioned responses, which we then come along and cover over with rational-sounding explanations (that are typically not tested in any scientific way).

It's illegal because there is a stated secular purpose for the law, which is to preserve the nuclear family. Though there may be religious reasons for many laws, if there are secular reasons as well, the law will be upheld on its secular grounds.

"there is seperation of church and state so it can't be a religious thing..." Right, that's why gay marriage is legal here, and government offices are open on Sundays. In this case it's not explicitly because churches came out and said they demanded it, but it is probably based on the country being, at the beginning, mostly populated (not started by, the founding fathers were deists) by people who were so religious that they got kicked out of england for being too uptight. ;)

It's legal, the way it's structured is so as the legality of two people being married is upheld, prenups and all that jazz, joint mortgages, etc. To change that law would mean changing every single institutions' (including policies and that) laws and guidelines. Way too much of a hassle considering how many insitutions there are. It would also mean that our culture would be wreaked, the ideals that people have would be tainted, and the acceptance of having more than one woman or man in a marriage would take too long. There are too many conservatives and too many institutions that base their entire model on monogomous marriage.

Because if I had 5 wives and divorced them, I'd have to pay a huge amount of alimony.

First off, separation of church and state is not the law in America. However, this is irrelevant because the government does not need a reason. Why does the government not need a reason? Well, because you cannot be deprived of something that you only have because the government gives it to you. You are permitted to marry one person because the government says you are permitted. They could very well not permit anyone to marry. In either event, what are you being deprived of? There are actually reasons why many states define marriage as between one man and one woman. The primary reason for marriage laws is to facilitate the creation of new families. The government want to promote the nuclear family because it is the most stable for society and in the best interest of children.

The right to marry is a liberty interest protected from unreasonable state infringements by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. By law, the state prohibits a person from being married to more than one person at the same time. Before you may enter into a second marriage, you must dissolve your first marriage in accordance with state law. The legal requirement that you divorce your first spouse before you marry a second spouse is constitutional so long as the law is rationally related to a legitimate state interest. The state has a legitimate interest in ensuring that your spouse and children from your first marriage are taken care of before you may be allowed to take on a second spouse and perhaps even more children. By requiring that your first marriage is legally dissolved, issues concerning spousal support, child support, child custody and property division will be addressed by a court. Therefore, the requirement that you divorce your first spouse before you marry a second spouse is rationally related to the state's legitimate interest in tending to the needs of your first family. After all, the state doesn't want your spouse and children from your first marriage ending up on public welfare and provided for at taxpayer expense.

Actually, It is a religious issue for most people. Polygamy by most Christians is looked down upon. There are many laws that are based off religious views, even though there is a seperation of chruch and state. One prime example is not being able to buy beer on sundays, though most places are changing this, the law was based upon religious views. Seeing as when those laws were placed the majority of state representatives were religous and Christian, it is not surprising that banning things that was considered inappropriate in religious standards to happen