Will Approval of “Throuples" Adopting Children Pave the Way for Polygamy in the West?
Odds are against it given the current make-up of the U.S. Supreme Court, but it wouldn’t shock me either.
Back in 2015 when the U.S. Supreme Court issued the Obergefell v Hodges decision that held that the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution guaranteed same-sex couples the right to marry, I commented that the logical conclusion of that holding would result in the legalization of polygamy. I opined that the legal case would likely come from a Muslim immigrant, not a Mormon despite the history of polygamy in Mormonism. I posited that the Free Exercise Clause would be combined with the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause to hold that the Constitution doesn’t prohibit three consenting adults from practicing their religion via polygamy. Logically, if same-sex couples could marry, then what would constitutionally prevent a man from marrying two women as permitted by their religion? After all, Islam isn’t some obscure, fringe religion—it is the second most practiced religion in the world, with roughly two billion adherents.
Last week, a piece of news from up north caught me eye. As reported, Quebec approved:
its first adoption by a polyamorous trio—a “throuple”—granting three men legal recognition as parents of a 3-year-old girl.
The groundbreaking case follows a Superior Court ruling earlier this year that affirmed children can have more than two legal parents.
…
The ruling has provoked intense debate. Conservative commentators and some faith-based groups have warned of a slippery slope—arguing that redefining parentage could open the door to polygamous marriage or “marriages” involving multiple unrelated people and in extreme formulations to relationships that critics call morally objectionable.
While I recognize Quebec, Canada, is not America, the rationale isn’t that far from the Obergefell reasoning. Back in 2017, California permitted three men living as a “throuple” via a surrogate to be listed on the child’s birth certificate, thereby giving all three men legal rights as parents. Another “throuple” in California legally adopted a child in 2021. One has to wonder why these “throuples” haven’t filed a lawsuit to have their polyamorous relationships legally recognized.
I also acknowledge that the U.S. Supreme Court looks very different from what it looked like in 2015, with Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer retired and Ruth Bader Ginsburg deceased. That leaves just Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor from the Obergefell majority. Presumably Ketanji Brown Jackson would join them in a pro-polygamy decision extending the Obergefell case law. John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito remain from the minority, with Neil Gorsuch likely joining them—though Roberts flipping to the pro-polygamy side wouldn’t shock me, as he noted in his Obergefell dissent that, from a personal autonomy standpoint, restricting marriage to two people would be hard to do. That leaves Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett left to swing the decision one way or the other.
In 1879, Reynolds v United States held that polygamy was NOT protected because the First Amendment “protects religious belief but not religious practices that violate the ‘peace and good order of society’.” One could make a very strong argument that polygamy today wouldn’t “violate the peace and good order of society,” especially given that the migration of Muslims to America over the last one hundred years has changed the make-up of society, with mosques in most mid-to-large cities. Additionally, TLC has aired the hit show Sister Wives for nineteen seasons beginning in 2010 featuring a Mormon family in which the man has several wives (one legally with the rest spiritually). Sister Wives pulls impressive ratings:
As a result of the 2.7 million average viewership for the two episodes, TLC ranked first among all ad-support cable channels in the 18–49 and 25–54 age groups. The series drew double- and triple-digit rating gains in all key demographics and ranked second in ad-supported cable network shows during its timeslot.
Though polygamy is legal in fifty-eight of the world’s 200 countries, not one western country has yet crossed the Rubicon to permit it. At her confirmation hearing Coney Barrett did note that the right to marry has consistently been deemed a fundamental right. Would Coney Barrett deny a Muslim man and two women, a “throuple,” or a fundamentalist Mormon family the fundamental right to marry? My guess is that Kavanaugh likely would do what Coney Barrett does should such a case reach them.
Could we eventually see a 5-4 decision legalizing polygamy? Odds are against it given the current make-up of the U.S. Supreme Court, but it wouldn’t shock me either.
In other news, in Maine and Minnesota, two cars were recently photographed with stickers saying “Make Assassination Great Again” on the bumpers of the cars. Can you imagine if such stickers were around in 1964 after John Kennedy’s assassination? Has the Left in America really gotten so repulsive that it believes driving around with pro-assassination stickers on cars is socially acceptable? How would the Left and its media sychophants reacted to the proliferation of “Hope and Assassination” stickers in 2009 after Barack Obama won the presidency? I sometimes am left dazed by the extent of the Left’s hatred of Donald Trump and his voters.
P.S. U.S. News and World Report issued its 2025 education rankings. Ohio’s higher education offerings resulted in a dismal #41 ranking. Only Ohio State (#41) and Case Western Reserve University (#51) make the top 100 schools. Only four other schools qualified for the top 200: University of Dayton and Miami University tied at #143, University of Cincinnati at #158, and Ohio University at #179.
In “Want to Talk About Equity? Then Look at How the State Funds the Futures of Ohio’s K-12 Graduates,” I argued that Ohio needs to rebalance how it funds higher education versus tech, trade, and non-degreed professions. I noted how Ohio should stop funding weak graduate programs and close poorly performing colleges and universities in order to more strongly support top programs. I wrote:
Now, I cannot fathom why policymakers would provide ANY funding to graduate programs for either liberal arts Ph.Ds or law, medical, or business degrees not ranked in the top 100 in America. The last things Ohio needs are more Ph.Ds in art history or lawyers with middling academic credentials.
...
[Ohio needs to m]ake the tough decision on closing some of Ohio’s 2- and 4-year colleges and universities so investment in the rest can push programs into the top 100 nationally [and a]n in-depth survey of Ohio college and university graduates should be done to determine the average pay of each major to help determine if taxpayer investments are worth the cost.
Based on the latest numbers I collected when I wrote the above piece, only 15% of Ohio K-12 public school graduates went to college AND got a degree in six years. That leaves 85% of Ohio K-12 graduates who don’t graduate from college and who get very little financial support. Some doubted these figures when I published them, but Fort Worth, Texas, did a similar analysis of the nearly 30,000 8th graders from 2011-2013. Of those kids, 78% graduated from a Texas high school, with just 14% earning a four-year college degree in six years. If Ohio wants to earn a better ranking for its higher education assets, it should do as I recommended re funding strong programs, closing weak schools and programs, and providing more funding to the 85% of K-12 graduates who don’t make it in higher education. Other states like Texas are making those tough decisions and attracting Ohio’s best and brightest as they do.
For what it is worth, given the data, we should start referring to colleges and universities as six-year programs, not four-year given a majority of students who enter such schools don’t exit within four years. That would be truth in advertising giving potential students a realistic view on not just how long, but how much they will spend getting a six-year degree.
