A new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll finds that an overwhelming number of New Jerseyans want to vote on the question of same-sex marriage so that they can approve it. According to the poll, 69 percent of respondents support a referendum, and 62 percent of respondents would vote yes for marriage equality while only 30 percent would oppose it. Indeed, 75 percent of those who support a referendum are supporters. Support continues to be highest among Democrats (72 percent) and independents (63 percent), and lowest among Republicans (40 percent) and self-identified conservatives (31 percent).

This year, New Jersey legislators are still contemplating overriding Gov. Chris Christie’s (R) veto from last year, but it’s unclear if they will secure the votes necessary. A lawsuit is also proceeding asserting that civil unions fall short of providing equality to same-sex couples. Though a referendum seems like it would have promise if advanced, it would still require an expensive campaign and would have negative consequences for the LGBT community.

Jacob Rudolph (Photo Credit: Thomas P. Costello)

In January, Jacob Rudolph came out as an LGBT teen to his fellow seniors at Parisppany High School in New Jersey and received a standing ovation in a video that quickly went viral. He has since launched a petition urging Gov. Chris Christie (R) to support a proposed ban to ex-gay therapy for minors. On Monday, Jacob testified on behalf of this bill before the Senate Health, Human Services, and Senior Citizens Committee, which voted to advance it. Powerfully declaring his identity as a bi teen, he told the panel about some of the responses he received to his viral coming out video:

RUDOLPH: Like every other LGBT person, I am not broken, I am not confused, and I do not need to be fixed. I did not choose my sexual orientation, but what I did choose was to pretend to be somebody that I was not. I came to terms with myself that I was bisexual when I was in the 9th grade, but I was truly afraid to share with anyone else who I really was. High school is challenging enough for teens who are straight, but it is even more challenging for LGBT teens, because they have to risk alienating their friends, being subjected to taunts and physical violence, and having their families reject them. [...]

The video of my speech was posted online and has since received nearly 2 million hits. Of all the responses I have received, however, the ones that meant the most to me were those that were sent by five teenagers from various locations across the United States. Each of those five teenagers had something in common: they had made preparations to commit suicide before watching my video, yet after watching my video they all decided against it. Some of these teens had been rejected by their families, who’d believed they had chosen to be gay, and these families refused to accept them for who they are.

It is beyond baffling to me that anyone might actually believe that sexual orientation is a “lifestyle choice” that can be altered if desired. Even more disturbing, however, is that there are organizations whose sole mission is to “cure” LGBT individuals of their orientation through the truculent practices that have been deemed dangerously harmful and ineffective by the American Psychological Association and other meritable groups.

Watch his full testimony:

Those advocating for ex-gay therapy claim there is no evidence that it doesn’t work. Unfortunately for them, there is no evidence that it does work, and there is evidence that it’s harmful.

In early 2012, lawmakers in New Jersey successfully passed marriage equality bill, but Gov. Chris Christie (R) vetoed it, claiming same-sex marriage was not an issue of “gay rights.” The legislature has until January 2014 to attempt to override that veto, and Democratic leaders in both chambers announced this week that they will attempt to do just that.

The bill originally passed the Senate with a 24-16 vote, so only three more votes are needed to reach a two-thirds majority for the override. In the Assembly, however, the bill only passed 42-33, so 12 more votes are needed. Lawmakers will likely wait until after the June elections to hold the vote so that Republicans are more willing to consider a controversial vote. LGBT activists have been lobbying for more support for an override since the bill’s passage last year, primarily because they are opposed to a referendum.

Openly gay Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D) actually wants to allow for a vote, because he believes “the worst thing that can happen is the status quo.” However, Senate President Steve Sweeney also opposes a referendum, and for good reasons. As Garden State Equality pointed out last year, ballot initiatives are “a contest of which side can raise more millions” that offers “a community’s civil rights up for sale to the highest bidder.” Not only is a referendum incredible expensive, but it can have harsh consequences for the mental health of the entire LGBT community.

Arguably, a majority of New Jersey voters do support marriage equality, with polls showing as many as 53 percent, if not 57 percent, support. That, however, should be motivation for lawmakers to simply do their job and represent the interests of their constituents. Marriage equality is what’s best for New Jersey’s economy and the well-being of its citizens, in addition to just being the right thing to do.

New Jersey lawmakers have all of 2013 to override Gov. Christie's marriage equality veto.

This week’s victories for marriage equality in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington certainly raise hopes for other states to recognize same-sex couples as well, but some of the enthusiasm for New Jersey has been misplaced. The New Jersey Star-Ledger wrote today that it’s “time for New Jersey to vote on gay marriage,” calling on the state’s legislature to “call Gov. Chris Christie’s (R) bluff” and put the question on the ballot, as Christie proposed when he vetoed a marriage equality bill earlier this year. The Advocate also entertained a similar suggestion. While the editorial board’s optimism is commendable, its approach is not in the best interest of gays and lesbians.

Regardless of recent success, voting on civil rights is still a dangerous and offensive experiment often forced by conservatives that should only be a last resort for LGBT advocates. The votes to uphold marriage equality in Maryland and Washington only took place because opponents petitioned for a challenge to laws passed by the states’ legislatures. In Maine, challengers successfully overturned the will of the legislature using that process in 2009, so a people’s vote to reverse it was the only practical avenue to equality left — hence, this year’s ballot initiative. In New Jersey, there is no people’s veto process like in those other states, and there is also no ballot initiative petition process. The only way the public can vote on a law there is if the legislature gives them the opportunity to, and there are plenty of reasons why it is not — and likely never will be — an appropriate time for that step.

First of all, it’s unrealistic to assume from this week’s results that the pursuit of marriage equality will always be successful. It was only seven months ago that North Carolina passed its amendment banning any and all legal recognition of same-sex relationships. A May poll showed 53 percent of New Jersey voters support marriage equality, a slim margin.  Garden State Equality, New Jersey’s preeminent LGBT advocacy organization, opposes the referendum process, pointing out that it’s a very expensive gamble on civil liberties:

Let’s be real about what a referendum is – it’s not just a contest of popular opinion.  A referendum is also a contest of which side can raise more millions.  A referendum puts a community’s civil rights up for sale to the highest bidder.  Would you want your civil rights to be at the mercy of the financial infestation of our political system?  Aren’t we sick of the Super PAC lies that slice our society with hate?  Can you imagine the exponential hate – and cost – that would infest a marriage equality referendum in hardball New Jersey?

Studies have also shown that state marriage referenda have many negative impacts on the gay and lesbian people living in that state, even if they do not participate at all in advocacy. Among these side effects are heightened stress — both for LGBT individuals and their children — divided families and communities, and extra psychological risk for those who engage in the hostile political campaign. Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington may have arrived at victory, but they endured millions of dollars of attack ads in the process.

New Jersey has several avenues to marriage equality that can avoid these circumstances. First, the legislature has until the end of 2013 to override Christie’s veto. Though the override does not yet have the 2/3 majority necessary, this is the solution Garden State Equality is supporting. At the same time, a lawsuit is advancing challenging the state’s civil unions law, arguing that it doesn’t offer equality for same-sex couples. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in 2006 (Lewis v. Harris) that the state’s constitution guarantees same-sex couples “every statutory right and benefit conferred to heterosexual couples.” The legislature at that time utilized the flexibility granted by the Court to pass civil unions instead of marriage, but created a review commission to ensure the ruling was upheld. That commission found in 2008 that civil unions certifiably fall short of this goal, suggesting the suit has a high potential for success.

Either the lawsuit’s success or the veto override could guarantee equality without the expensive, harmful, and risky process of a referendum. In addition, voters could elect a new legislature and governor in 2013 that won’t obstruct the progress of freedom. It’s unclear if any circumstances would ever suggest a referendum is the best option in New Jersey, but mere optimism from victories in other states is definitely not sufficient reason to abandon the other efforts.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) told a student at a Fort Lee high school this morning that “gay marriage” is not about extending rights to gay and lesbian Americans and insisted that it would “change the way we’ve governed our society”:

Q: His, chris christie, it’s a pleasure to meet you. Recently you passed an anti-bullying law, which I really am appreciative for, because bullying should not be allowed in the state of New Jersey, so i really thank you for that. However, one of the main reasons why kids even do get bullied in school is whether or not they’re homosexual. And recently there has been a bill to allow gay rights in the state of New Jersey. Can you tell me what was your decision to veto the bill, because I heard that you had vetoed the bill.

CHRISTIE: I did veto a bill on gay marriage, not on gay rights. And gay rights are protected and protected aggressively in New Jersey. But listen, this is something I feel strongly about. I think marriage is between one man and one woman, but I also know that people have very different opinions about that in our state. So what I’ve said to folks after vetoing the bill, let’s put it on the ballot. If a majority of people in New Jersey want to have same-sex marriage, then vote for it and I’ll be governed by it. But I don’t think that’s a decision that should be made by 121 people in Trenton alone. It’s a major change in the way we’ve governed our society.

Watch it:

Since Christie vetoed the measure, support for marriage equality has increased in the state. Fifty-seven percent of residents siad they would approve of a same-sex marriage law, but 67 percent supported Christie’s idea to decide the issue through a referendum.