This Washington
Marriage Equality Proponents File Second Ballot Challenge
Last week, opponents of Washington State's new same-sex marriage law filed a challenge to the state Solicitor General's ballot language for Referendum 74, which would overturn the law, arguing that the title “does not reference the significant and fundamental change in Washington’s law which would render the terms `husband’ and `wife’ as gender-neutral."
Today, the League of Women Voters and Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) challenged the ballot title from the opposite direction, arguing that the language is hard to understand, and, more importantly, prejudicial, because it includes the term "redefine marriage"---a highly charged scare phrase for gay marriage opponents.
"The Law permits civil marriage for same-sex couples; it does not change the meaning of marriage, alter the responsibilities or rights of married couples, or affect religious marriages in any way," the groups' appeal says. "No one's marriage would be 'redefined'by the Law.
"The term 'redefine marriage' is a well-established, poll-tested 'sound bite' that has been used for years in state after state across the country by those who seek to prohibit civil marriage for same-sex couples. In fact, one of the most frequent and vociferous opponents of extending civil marriage to same-sex couples, the National Organization for Marriage," calls "redefining marriage" its most effective sound bite. (True.)
Today is the deadline for appeals of R-74's ballot title. A Thurston County Superior Court judge must rule on the two challenges before R-74 proponents can start collecting signatures to put the measure on the November ballot. Opponents need to collect 120,577 valid signatures by June 6 to prevent the law from taking effect the next day.
Here's the text of the explanatory statement; full ballot language here .
This bill would redefine marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, modify existing domestic-partnership laws, allow clergy to refuse to solemnize or recognize marriages and religious organizations to refuse to accommodate marriage celebrations.
Please consider making a contribution to PubliCola.
Today, the League of Women Voters and Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) challenged the ballot title from the opposite direction, arguing that the language is hard to understand, and, more importantly, prejudicial, because it includes the term "redefine marriage"---a highly charged scare phrase for gay marriage opponents.
"The Law permits civil marriage for same-sex couples; it does not change the meaning of marriage, alter the responsibilities or rights of married couples, or affect religious marriages in any way," the groups' appeal says. "No one's marriage would be 'redefined'by the Law.
"The term 'redefine marriage' is a well-established, poll-tested 'sound bite' that has been used for years in state after state across the country by those who seek to prohibit civil marriage for same-sex couples. In fact, one of the most frequent and vociferous opponents of extending civil marriage to same-sex couples, the National Organization for Marriage," calls "redefining marriage" its most effective sound bite. (True.)
Today is the deadline for appeals of R-74's ballot title. A Thurston County Superior Court judge must rule on the two challenges before R-74 proponents can start collecting signatures to put the measure on the November ballot. Opponents need to collect 120,577 valid signatures by June 6 to prevent the law from taking effect the next day.
Here's the text of the explanatory statement; full ballot language here .
This bill would redefine marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, modify existing domestic-partnership laws, allow clergy to refuse to solemnize or recognize marriages and religious organizations to refuse to accommodate marriage celebrations.
Please consider making a contribution to PubliCola.
