“In my view, the salutary effects of the prohibition far outweigh the deleterious,” Chief Justice Robert Bauman wrote in his 335-page decision. “The law seeks to advance the institution of monogamous marriage, a fundamental value in Western society from the earliest of times. It seeks to protect against the many harms which are reasonably apprehended to arise out of the practice of polygamy.”

In the B.C. reference, the Attorneys General of B.C. and Canada, as well as pro-family interveners, argued the law is necessary because of the harms to society, especially women and children, through polygamous marriage.

"(The) Attorneys General have certainly demonstrated a reasoned apprehension of harm associated with polygamy. Indeed, they have cleared the higher bar: they have demonstrated ‘concrete evidence’ of harm,” Bauman wrote.

“This is a very positive outcome,” said Ruth Ross, Christian Legal Fellowship (CLF) executive director and general legal counsel. CLF was among the interveners arguing on behalf of the existing laws.

“We are pleased the court accepted the strong and convincing evidence demonstrating that polygamy harms women, children and society and that outlawing it does not compromise religious freedom.”

“The British Columbia Supreme Court recognized that Parliament had the right to protect and preserve monogamous marriage through the prohibition of polygamy,” said constitutional lawyer Gerald Chipeur, who acted for CLF in the case. “The chief justice recognized that it is for Parliament and not the courts to deal with such complex social issues.”

REAL Women of Canada, another intervener, also argued on the basis of harm. In a news release Nov. 23 REAL Women’s national vice president Gwendolyn Landolt said polygamy is “contrary to fundamental Canadian values.”

“It reduces women to be chattels rather than equal partners, and is harmful to children, depriving them of the immediacy and intimacy of a father,” Landolt said.

She warned that if polygamy was allowed, it “would open the floodgates of immigration to polygamist families at significant social and economic costs, which will eventually destabilize Canadian society.”

Institute of Marriage and Family executive director Dave Quist said the decision “sends a strong message across Canada that further changes to the institution of marriage is deleterious to society and should not be entertained.”

The chief justice noted in his decision that many of the same harms could arise in situations of multiple husbands (polyandry) or polygamous same-sex relationships. Those harms include those to children whose parents’ attention is divided or lower because of less genetic-relatedness, he said.

But COLF sees beyond a harms-based or religious freedom approach on marriage, said Murphy.

Christ provides the model for marriage in the image of the marriage between Christ and His Church, “which is free, faithful, fruitful and exclusive,” Murphy said.

“He is also the means by which we are enabled to live that call,” he said. “He’s the one who empowers us to live that exclusivity, that faithfulness, and that fruitfulness in freedom.”