Response to the New Same-Sex “Marriage” Propaganda Poll
Toni Meyer, Sr. Research Analyst, New Jersey Family Policy Council

Hoping to sway public opinion, homosexual activists in NJ have just released a new “poll” which seems to show that a slight majority of New Jerseyans support “giving homosexual couples the same ‘freedom’ to marry as heterosexual couples”. Yet this new poll, commissioned by Garden State Equality (a homosexual activist group) is biased in the way it both frames and poses questions to participants, which to some degree skewed the results to their favor. The questions were framed to be about “freedom” because activists know from their previous 2003 poll that they can get more people to agree to their position with such wording. What they didn’t explain to respondents is that currently no citizen is “free to marry”; unless they are a man and a woman, they are 18 or older, and they are not close blood relatives. Nevertheless, as has been evidenced across the country, once citizens are given all the facts, even in so-called blue states like California and Oregon, they have voted to preserve marriage between one man and one woman only.

What we should be asking is how would people respond to the idea of legalizing same-sex “marriage” if a poll contained explanations of these facts::

• Neither the state nor federal Constitution recognizes a fundamental “right” to marriage for anyone, but the government supports and encourages the union of one-man and one-woman due to the common benefits it brings to all of society. Though sexual relationships may involve a “right to privacy”, marriage is a public act, and therefore is subject to reasonable state regulation, such as our legal and constitutional laws that prohibit polygamy and underage marriage. Knowing these facts, should the NJ state legislature legalize same-sex “marriage”?
• Even gay sympathetic medical experts have concluded that homosexuality is not predetermined by genes alone, and that many individuals have successfully chosen to change from a homosexual lifestyle to a heterosexual lifestyle. Therefore, should the state redefine marriage based on a changeable lifestyle to accommodate same-sex couples, even if such a decision would allow the same legal arguments to be used for governmental support of other sexual choices such as polygamy and eventually pedophila?
• Since same-sex marriage has become legal in Massachusetts, school systems have been incorporating pro-homosexual teachings to curricula as early as the first grade. In fact, just recently a Massachusetts father met with the principal and board of education president to obtain assurance that his 6-year-old son would be exempt from such teaching. The school administrators would not grant his request, and also had him arrested because he said he would not leave until they did grant his request. The father spent the night in jail and was arraigned before a judge the next morning. Knowing that once same-sex marriage becomes legal, children will be taught methods of homosexual sex and taught that homosexual sex and homosexual marriage is an acceptable lifestyle, do you want same-sex marriage legalized in NJ?
• Marriage is an institution that has arisen from long-held beliefs and customs of people that are prior to all states and all courts, and are essential to the very fabric of society. Any attempt by unelected judges or any other branch of government to alter marriage without the support of a significant majority of people, or to diminish the father-mother-child relationship in favor of a state-citizen relationship, usurps the natural rights and freedoms of the people and constitutes a serious breech of trust. President Lincoln warned that when government leaves it up to the courts to make decisions, “the people will cease to be their own rulers.” Therefore, if the NJ Supreme Court were to legalize same-sex marriage without the consent of NJ citizens, should the state legislature enable New Jerseyans to vote on a constitutional amendment to overturn such a decision and preserve marriage between one man and one woman only?

A practical illustration of the difference it makes once citizens know more of the facts is to look at the polling results before and after California citizens voted on Proposition 22. Proposition 22 was a ballot question placed before the citizens of California asking if the state should bar same-sex “marriages. For months, polls of likely voters showed that only slightly over 50% backed the measure, and slightly less than 40% opposed it. Yet when all the votes were counted in November of 2000, Californians passed the pro-marriage legislation with 61% in favor and only 38% opposed. Once New Jersey citizens understand more of the facts about why we must preserve marriage between one man and one woman only, new polls will reflect a much stronger opposition to redefining the very foundation of our society.