Years after many declared the debate on same-sex marriage closed, a chapter of the Republican Party has passed a resolution defining marriage exclusively as the union of one man and one woman, based on nature and the testimony of Scripture.

On April 24, the Republican Party of Jackson County, Missouri, passed the “Defense of Marriage” resolution by a supermajority of 44-14, according to The Kansas City Star.

The pro-marriage resolution—a copy of which was provided exclusively to The Washington Stand—grounds its argument deep in American history and biblical imagery. It begins by noting that all people are endowed with unalienable rights to life and liberty “from the moment of our conception in nature by ‘Nature’s God,’” all terms used by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence.

The GOP then moves from the founding of our nation to the foundation of the world. “The first blessing of God is recorded in [Genesis] 1:28 and pronounced over one man and one woman, ‘be fruitful and multiply’ to substantiate the nuclear family through reproduction.” By this, “marriage is understood to be ordained by nature’s God as the only blessing of union by which new human beings are created,” adding all human beings are “equal in nature.”

“Marriage is valid only between one man and one woman in accordance with our state Constitution and supported by our Republican Party platform,” continues the resolution. “If any member of this committee attempts to change the definition of marriage to anything otherwise described than that which is firmly and clearly stated in this petition, they may become subject to censure.”

The measure came after Missouri state Rep. Chris Sander, a Republican, introduced a measure attempting to redefine marriage in the state constitution, which still upholds the biblical definition of marriage, from one man and one woman to “two individuals.”

A separate motion to censure Sander passed with a large majority, but not the supermajority required by party rules. That motion was opposed by Jackson County GOP Chair Mark Anthony Jones who, like Sander, identifies as gay, according to local media.

The measure follows a number of GOP censures imposed against senators and members of Congress who voted for the so-called Respect for Marriage Act, which redefined marriage for all 50 states nationwide.

Most recently, the Republican Party of Texas censured Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, in March. “Congressman Tony Gonzales is discouraged from participating in the 2024 Republican Party primary,” said the censure resolution adopted by the State Republican Executive Committee in an overwhelming 57-5 vote. 

The party is also authorized to spend funds against Gonzales in an upcoming primary, in which he has already drawn three potential Republican challengers: Medina County Republican Party Chairwoman Julie Clark, retired U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Victor Avila, and immigration-focused conservative Frank Lopez Jr.

“I’ll take them to the deep end of the political pool, and I’ll drown ‘em,” boasted Gonzales in March.

Gonzales responded to the resolution with a vulgar Spanish slang term. He later deemed efforts to secure the southern border by temporarily halting the flow of asylum-seekers “un-Christian.” 

The Texas Republican Party’s platform chose last summer to “affirm God’s biblical design for marriage and sexual behavior between one biological man and one biological woman” as “the foundation for all great nations in Western civilization.”

The Wyoming Republican State Central Committee adopted a “Resolution to Condemn” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., for “ignoring the tenets of the Republican Party” and “placing her personal interests and beliefs above those of the constituents she serves” in her vocal support for the marriage-redefinition bill.

Chapters of the GOP in Iowa have condemned Sen. Joni Ernst and Rep. Ashley Hinson for the vote, and North Carolina Republicans censured former Sen. Richard Burr—and threatened to withhold party funds from incumbent Sen. Thom Tillis.

In February, eight members of the Iowa House of Representatives introduced HJR 8. Another bill, House File 508, would declare the “Respect for Marriage” Act “null and void” on the grounds of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Both bills were referred to the House Judiciary Committee without further action.

All were part of the 39 House Republicans and 12 Republican senators who voted for the marriage-redefinition bill championed by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and signed by President Joe Biden.

All these resolutions conform to the most recent Republican Party platform, readopted in 2020, which states:

Traditional marriage and family, based on marriage between one man and one woman, is the foundation for a free society and has for millennia been entrusted with rearing children and instilling cultural values.

We condemn the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Windsor, which wrongly removed the ability of Congress to define marriage policy in federal law. We also condemn the Supreme Court’s lawless ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which in the words of [then-Justice] Antonin Scalia was a ‘judicial putsch’—full of ‘silly extravagances’—that reduced ‘the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of a fortune cookie.’

In Obergefell, five unelected lawyers robbed 320 million Americans of their legitimate constitutional authority to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The Jackson County Republican Party of Missouri has not shied away from expressing its members’ faith, posting Bible verses and recognizing Christian holidays on social media.

Its marriage-affirming declaration came nearly eight years after the Supreme Court’s 5-4 Obergefell v. Hodges opinion supposedly settled the issue of same-sex marriage. Before the Supreme Court fiat, 45 states—including California—had democratically voted to define marriage between one man and one woman, and only three (Maine, Maryland, and Washington) enacted same-sex marriage by popular referendum. 

Last November, the plaintiff behind the controversial case, Jim Obergefell, lost an election in the bellwether state of Ohio by a landslide.

Originally published at WashingtonStand.com

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.