The Washington State Attorney General's office has released its proposed ballot language for Referendum 74, which would overturn the marriage equality law passed and signed by the governor this month.

The bill would redefine marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, apply marriage eligibility requirements without regard to gender, and specify that laws using gender-specific terms like “husband” and “wife” include same-sex spouses. Clergy could refuse to solemnize or recognize any marriages. Religious organizations and religiously affiliated educational institutions could refuse to accommodate weddings. The measure would not affect licensing of religious organizations providing adoption, foster-care, or child-placement. Domestic partnerships for seniors would be preserved.

There is a five-day period for anyone to challenge the language. Once the language is finalized—Thurston County Superior Court will take up any challenges—the sponsors can begin collecting signatures. They have until June 6—90 days after the conclusion of this year's legislative session—to turn in 120,153 valid signatures.

The referendum is being proposed by the Family Policy Institute of Washington, the same group that tried, but failed, to overturn the state's domestic partnership rights law in 2009. This time they pledge to be more organized and will likely get major financial support from the DC-based National Organization for Marriage, the group that outlawed gay marriage in California (Prop 8 ) in 2008.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that Prop. 8 was unconstitutional earlier this month.

Zach Silk, spokesman for Washington United for Marriage, the group defending the new law, tells us, "there are some obvious issues with the attorney general's proposal." He says "there will be a challenge" and explains: "'Redefine marriage' does not appear anywhere in the bill, but it is a phrase that is prominently featured in highly charged political communication from our opponents. In fact, there is ample evidence that this phrase is literally out of their playbook."

Silk is right. National Organization for Marriage's web site uses this wording in their recommendation for "most effective" language.

From NOM's website:

I. THE MOST EFFECTIVE SINGLE SENTENCE:

Extensive and repeated polling agrees that the single most effective message is:

"Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose,
they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us."

This allows people to express support for tolerance while opposing gay marriage. Some modify it to “People have a right to live as they choose, they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us.”

Language to avoid at all costs: "Ban same-sex marriage." Our base loves this wording. So do supporters of SSM. They know it causes us to lose about ten percentage points in polls. Don’t use it. Say we’re against “redefining marriage” or in favor or “marriage as the union of husband and wife” NEVER “banning same-sex marriage.”

We have a message out to FPIW for a reaction the ballot language.