Gideon and Rachel Codding say they weren’t looking to start a big political row when they made a snap decision at the county clerk’s office: writing in “bride” and “groom” on the state’s new gender-neutral marriage certificate.

Party A and Party B – the new terms printed on the form after the California Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage earlier this year – just weren’t quite the same, they felt, as the “bride” and “groom” that previously identified newlyweds.

“I want to be called a groom and my wife wants to be called a bride,” said Gideon, 29.

Now, the Roseville couple’s decision has become a flashpoint in the debate over same-sex marriage after the state rejected the certificate because it had been altered.

On conservative blogs and Web forums, the couple’s experience is serving as a rallying cry for those who feel the ruling and subsequent changes to marriage certificates amounts to a watering down of the institution of marriage. And a conservative legal group is using it to generate support for Proposition 8, the November ballot initiative that would amend the state’s constitution to bar same-sex marriage.

“This is a major slap in the face for traditional marriage,” Brad Dacus, president of the Sacramento-based Pacific Justice Institute, said in a news release.

The incident arose after Gideon printed the word “Groom” above the form’s section for Party A’s personal information. Above Party B’s section, he wrote “Bride.”

Two weeks after the couple’s wedding ceremony on Aug. 16, a letter from the Placer County Clerk’s Office informed them the state’s Office of Vital Records rejected the form because the handwritten words were considered alterations. The letter said they would have to fill out a new form to be legally recognized – something the couple has so far declined to do.

“This was a state decision,” said Placer County Clerk Jim McCauley. “We tried to send it through the way they had it. There’s various laws on the books that say if you alter a document, it makes it invalid.”

State officials say they were not aware of a previous rejection because of marriage applicants writing in “bride” and “groom.”

Janet Huston, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Public Health, said the rule against altering documents in the state’s Health and Safety Code predates the state high court’s decision.

“The law requires the forms not be altered,” she said. “It doesn’t matter whether it’s bride or groom or blue and purple.”

The Coddings, though, say signing their names under the traditional terms is about more than just labels.

“We were just really happy that we were able to get married and bless our families, but bride and groom was taken away from us and bride and groom is associated with being married,” Gideon said. “It’s part of the traditions we’ve inherited from generations past and we don’t need to just hand those over without saying, ‘Where are my rights?’”

The conservative Pacific Justice Institute pounced on the issue to promote Proposition 8, saying in a news release heterosexual couples “will be forced to wed out of state if they wish to be officially identified as bride and groom or husband and wife” if the measure doesn’t pass.

But backers of same-sex marriage say the Supreme Court’s ruling on May 15 was about expanding marriage rights to include everyone, not about taking them away from others.

“Having more people have their committed relationships given dignity and respect really strengthens the institution of marriage, and really strengthens families,” said Dale Kelly Bankhead, the statewide campaign manager for No on 8. “Nobody’s marriage is diminished; to the contrary, marriage is strengthened.”

Rocklin resident Robin Richie, who married her partner Dru in June, agreed.

“I don’t think not having ‘bride’ or ‘groom’ on a marriage license is going to invalidate who you are sexually,” she said, adding what verbiage is printed on a form “is seriously not what being married is all about.

“Legal recognition for us, at least on a state level, validates the relationship as far as we are making a lifelong commitment together, that we are more than simply two roommates,” she added.

For their part, the Coddings, who met at Roseville’s Abundant Life Fellowship, where Rachel’s father is the senior pastor, say they wouldn’t be against simply offering different forms for different unions.

“I’m not calling out anyone or any one group,” Gideon said. “However it gets resolved the end result is I want to be called groom and my wife called a bride and that’s it.”

Until then, the couple is sitting tight, even though their decision means difficulties sharing health insurance and other benefits that come with marriage.

“I understand what it takes to fix it, but we’re not willing to do that,” Gideon said.