Seattle City Council Unanimously Votes to Recognize Polyamory, Expand Definition of “Sexual Orientation”
On September 15, the Seattle City Council voted unanimously in favor of an ordinance to recognize polyamory in city code.
In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down state marriage laws nationwide with its Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. The decision effectively legalized same-sex marriage across the country. But it also unintentionally opened the door to polygamy and polyamory.
We have seen multiple examples of polygamists riding the coattails of the same-sex marriage movement in court and elsewhere.
Seattle’s polyamory ordinance grants special protections to “consensual relationships involving multiple partners” in city code concerning housing, employment, places of public accommodation, policing, and human rights.
The ordinance also removes the words “male or female” from the definitions of “sexual orientation” in Seattle’s municipal code, and it expands the list of sexual orientations to include pansexuality and asexuality.
Same-sex marriage’s fundamental argument is that a person should be able to marry whoever they want. If that’s true, polygamists argue, then a person also should be able to marry as many people as they want.
Back in 2015 Chief Justice John Roberts made this point when he wrote his dissenting opinion on Obergefell, saying:
“One immediate question invited by the majority’s position [regarding same-sex marriage] is whether States may retain the definition of marriage as a union of two people. . . .
“It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage.”
But Americans as a whole may not be as supportive of polygamy, polyamory, and pro-LGBT ideology as the City of Seattle.
Gallup’s 2026 “Moral Acceptability” survey found that among Democrats, support for changing a person’s gender is down 11 points and support for polygamy is down 10 points since last year.
Among Republicans, Gallup found only 5% support sex-change procedures, and 7% say polygamy is morally acceptable.
It’s important for Christians to remember that the Bible does not support polygamy. The biblical design for marriage is the union of one man to one woman for a lifetime. The Bible does tell stories about people who practiced polygamy. In nearly every one of those stories — from Abraham to Elkanah to Solomon — polygamy is tied to serious problems.
Marriage is about more than the rights and privileges of adults.
It’s also about the rights and welfare of children. The best place for a child is in a stable home with a married mother and father.
Polygamy and polyamory have a consistent history of demeaning women and hurting children.
Most Americans seem to understand that. Cities like Seattle should recognize it as well.
Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.
“Prediction Market” Gambling Platforms Finally Face Scrutiny in Court
“Prediction market” gambling platforms have suffered a series of blows in court over the past few weeks.
Prediction markets are companies that exploit loopholes in federal law to bring casino-style gambling to anyone with a smartphone. While traditional gambling operates under state oversight and state law, prediction market platforms claim protection under federal commodities laws.
But instead of letting people invest in futures for gold or crude oil, companies like Kalshi and Polymarket let people “invest” in the future outcome of a ballgame, tomorrow’s weather, foreign policy, and so on.
But calling it an “investment” does not change reality. When prediction market platforms let users “trade” hundreds of millions of dollars on who will win the Super Bowl, that’s gambling. But unlike other forms of gambling, prediction markets are not accountable to state gambling laws.
However, prediction markets seem to be facing more scrutiny in court.
Earlier this summer Kentucky’s attorney general announced lawsuits against Kalshi and Polymarket for “bypassing” consumer protections and tax requirements in the state’s gambling laws.
Last month, the City of Baltimore sued Kalshi and Polymarket for violating consumer protection laws “by operating illegal, unlicensed sports-betting platforms and misleading consumers about the legality and regulatory status of their products.”
The State of Connecticut has also sued Kalshi for conducting unlicensed internet gambling in violation of state law.
In August a three-judge panel from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal law does not prevent states from regulating prediction markets like Kalshi.
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin joined an amicus brief in that case against Kalshi. Griffin previously issued an opinion that Kalshi’s operation likely violates Arkansas law.
Earlier this month, a federal judge in Iowa rejected Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction to block Iowa from regulating Kalshi under state gambling laws. Like the 9th Circuit, the judge said federal law likely does not prevent the State of Iowa from regulating prediction markets.
We have written before about how prediction markets are particularly troubling. Up until now, they have operated without state oversight. In particular, sports betting is big business on prediction market platforms. This type of gambling is out of control. It’s ruining lives and corrupting sports.
It’s good to see our federal courts finally taking steps to let states restrict this type of predatory gambling.
Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.