It's perplexing to Rep. LaVar Christensen that something so simple as defining marriage as the union of "a man and a woman" in Utah's Constitution seems to be stirring up so much controversy.

Voters overwhelmingly approved similar measures in Louisiana last week, and another passed in Missouri last month. And it seems to Christensen, R-Draper, that the measure he sponsored should be a slam dunk in Utah, where family values are deeply rooted in the culture.

Polls show he's probably right. But the apparent lack of coordination among the coalition of groups backing Amendment 3 is making it difficult to get their message across to voters. And some political observers say that has created an opportunity for opponents, who are creating confusion and skepticism among voters with the slogan: "It goes too far."

The campaigns supporting the amendment so far "seem to be at odds in emphasizing different things. It could really cloud their efforts," said LaVarr Webb, a GOP consultant, Deseret Morning News political columnist and partner with The Exoro Group.

But amendment backers say they are getting their act together and voters will see a coordinated campaign launched early next month.

"We have the same purpose: defending traditional marriage between a man and a woman," said Gayle Ruzicka, director of Constitutional Defense of Marriage Alliance, one of four campaigns working to support the amendment.

To get that message across, says Bill Paulos, chief executive officer of The Summit Group Communications, the various amendment supporters must speak in a unified voice. By presenting the same message in "slightly different shades of gray," multiple campaigns can actually help ballot initiatives by broadening the base of voters, he said.

"In an initiative race, you need to pull together differing spectrums of the political landscape," Paulos said. "On a smaller budget it allows (campaigns) to get direct information out to more groups."

Webb said the message of traditional marriage, and families, is one that tends to ring well with Utah voters.

"Generally, if people don't know much about an initiative, they'll vote against it," Webb said. "On this one, the majority of Utahns are predisposed to support marriage. Their initial disposition may be to vote for this one."

However, political observers contacted by the Deseret Morning News say they've yet to see a clearly defined message presented by amendment supporters, and without that, they run the risk of confusing voters.

Don't Amend campaign manager Scott McCoy leads a well-organized and well-financed effort, which is trying to draw attention away from the definition of marriage, by zeroing in on the second sentence of Amendment 3, which would prevent any other union from being given the "same or substantially equivalent legal effect" as a marriage.