There is a reasonably good biblical argument for the acceptability of polygamy, if one really wants to make it.
By contrast, there's no argument at all for gay marriage.
So, if our frontier-pushers had decided to get things in the right order, they would have pressed first for polygamy, and pointed to the endless Old Testament accounts of it, and the lack of SPECIFIC condemnation of it by Jesus. One can INFER monogamy from Jesus, but it's not explict, not like his condemnation of divorce is.
By contrast, that there's no such thing as gay marriage is OBVIOUS. Curious, then, that so many liberal churches, such as the American Episcopal Church, have embraced gay civil unions, etc., with a will, but shun polygamy. NORMAL male desires (to have bunches of women), are to be tempered by restraint and reproved, but lecherous buggery is to proclaimed from the episcopacy.
Right before the Flood a strange race of sons of God is described in Genesis. They were very much after daughters of men, of whom they "took to themselves wives of all which they chose". They did not do well. The next chapter explains how orderly the couple-by-couple process of loading the Ark was to be. Male and female, male and female, about a dosen times, in case Noah (monogamous one) and his three sons (ditto) missed the point.
No, there isn't. Polygamy was never part of God's design. It was one of the corruptions of men. The OT patriarchs who practiced it did not receive God's blessing until they gave up that particular sin.
1Ti 3:12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.
Tit 1:6 namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion.