That polygamy should be legalised

Is there an automatic refute button on this site?

I've mentioned that just like other marriage rules, very specific and rational set of rules should be set of in case of polygamy also rather than considering it illegal. Particularly, in many of the western countries, where homosexuality is legal, it is only too ridiculous that polygamy is illegal.
Going step by step-
1) My opponent started with a very biased and ignorant statement that "In all polygamous cultures on the planet, women have extremely low status." and
"Polygamy is almost never polyandry".
Now, there are many cultures, some being nomadic, some restricted to specific regions like the Himalayas, where polyandrous culture exists and family is highly matriarchal as well.
So right with the basic understanding itself, my opponent has flawed miserably.
And now when the word polygamy instructs very well that it can be polygyny or polyandry, its highly immature to draw a conclusion that its almost never polyandry.

2) My opposition still continues with the bias that polyandry doesn't exist and makes his next flawed statement that "Polygamy skews the natural ratio of marriageable men and women. If one man can take 20 women as spouses, then 19 men must do without spouses entirely."

Like I mentioned, we live in cultured society, I hope my opposing friend also does...I fervently hope that because only then he can understand the depth of what I've mentioned in my post...."Often it is argued, opposing the legalization of polygamy, that it results in many individuals remaining unable to find suitable partners. But isn't this the case with any marriage, even monogamy? For example, when a girl gets married to a guy, the probability of another guy to find a partner decreases by a factor. But how is it a crime? It needs to be kept in mind that the institution of polygamy is never that of a forced relation, but one that is intended to bring more flexibility in a cultured society of mutually respecting individuals."
So if it is the probability of finding suitable partner that is the criteria, in an already existing world where there is no perfect balance in the sex ratio, polygamy is rather the only option. But I personally don't believe that idea of probability and if my opposition as he says he is concerned on probability, can try endorsing polygamy unlike what he is trying not to.... :P

So when 2 or more people willingly and understandingly involve in a marital relation,the entire probabilistic idea of another losing his/her chance becomes invalid since for those who are in a relation all that matters is that they remain together rather than sex ratio of the world...!!!
To end this point, will my opposition give away his/her partner to someone who doesn't have one???

3) My opposition has shown the audacity of comparing an uncultured family/groups of families to an entire world here...!!!!
"Most North American "families" in polygamous situations are on welfare or food stamps. The men in these "families" cannot financially support all the women and children, and the women are generally not permitted the freedom to choose a career and work outside the family compound. This shows that in a modern society, polygamous marriages are neither healthy nor stable institutions."

This only shows that that particular family/groups of families are uncultured, illogical and don't respect individual freedom. And world is bigger that "North America" the last time I looked at the map....!!!
Now as i told, it would have been a lot better if my opposition took his time to go through what I've written in my 1st post..."Certain legal aspects can also be introduced to ensure the logic of polygamy, that in a relation if the sole earning person is involving in polygamy, he/she should have the financial background to be able to take good care of either of his partners equally."

4) Talking about religion, my opposition happened to frame a statement that goes as, "According to the religion of these cultures, women are only permitted into heaven by permission of their "husband."..."

Lemme clarify it stating that the idea of polygamy is not restricted to any religion. In the modern society, it is a purely personal choice which people take, respecting and loving each other. And by restricting polygamy to "religion of these cultures" if my opponent is trying to hint at the Mormon, Christian and Islam cultures, I should say, none of these makes it mandatory to be involved in polygamy. It is left upon the choice of individual. However, a few twisted interpretations have been given to some verses of Qur'an and Bible by some so called scholars that women are supposed to be weaker than men and that they are meant to be controlled and ruled over. But in the modern days of civilization and individual freedom what interpretations are given to these scriptures matters little, because as i mentioned, it is a choice taken by individuals.

Now considering the above mentioned cultures, particularly the Islam, they don't treat polygamy as wrong and so does the nations where there is a considerable Islam population, like the middle-east. And as a matter of fact, the problems which my opponent has previously mentioned in regard with polygamy is least there, compared to places where it is a crime. Because there are specific laws to deal with situation there. However, in this aspect of Islam alone, it is rather a matter of ridiculous nature that only polygyny is considered legal as per the texts. But a generalization based on that singularity would be suicidal in nature...!!!!
And with most other religion/cultures, they leave it totally as a personal choice of lifestyle, which my opponent should start admiring.

5) Talking about immigration, lemme clarify that no man/woman is married to half a nation unlike what you mentioned. So a man/woman who are involved in polygamy are denied their right to life when they migrate to a place where it is illegal. And this, as I mentioned, will only increase crime rates since people start living hiding from the government and mainstream society, the only solution being accepting them and providing proper legal existence for them and the related marital condition they live in.

6) And again and again my opponent is mixing the concept of polygamy with women's right. I don't know if my opponent lives in a society where there is no personal rights/choices. But I don't. And I know that with time the greater world has only grown broader in it's mentality. So polygamy is not synonym to rape. Neither does it mean that more and more individuals are added into a relation everyday. It is a closed relation involving more than 2 understanding and respecting individuals, which given a legal existence and proper jurisdiction will help many families/groups of families come into mainstream society and hence even reduce crime rates.

Also a person born in a polygamous family need not be a polygamist. Are every criminals born in criminal families? What about homosexuals?? Please don't tell they are born IN homosexual families. And please don't tell that homosexuality is always genetic/biological, since its many a times psychological and induced as well. 

7) And speaking about biology or natural instincts, which means as seen in nature, one can very easily see that polygamy is so very common in nature, unlike homosexuality. As a matter of fact most living beings in natural circumstances live in polygamous condition.

8) And finally speaking about Canada, there is a lot of difference between a puny little country, which annihilates the right of women/men, denying their right to share of property, stating that their very existence as spouse is not legally accepted and the rest of the world. So effectively my opposition is denying many people their right to live and their right to equal share of property of their spouse, which is practically diabolic and inhuman...and I request my opposition to be more gentle and humane at least in his words..!!!!

fck u