Vote yes

In the controversy over the USG same-sex marriage referendum, I would love to debate the substantive issue at hand — whether or not the Princeton Justice Project, in its amicus brief on behalf of seven same-sex couples seeking to marry in New Jersey, is correct in its arguments.

Those opposed to the referendum, however, seem to want to stay as far away from that debate as possible. Instead, they've slapped together a constantly changing rationale for why Princeton students should not be permitted to vote on this issue, the latest being that it supposedly has no direct impact on students at the University. The PJP's Gay Family Rights Project not only believes the USG should sign onto our amicus brief because the outcome of Lewis v. Harris directly impacts Princeton students, but also because it affects them more than Gratz v. Bollinger ever could have.

In the 2003 Gratz v. Bollinger case, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the role of affirmative action in college undergraduate admissions. During that time, Princeton students voted by referendum to support a USG resolution in favor of using race as a factor in admission decisions, which was added to the Ivy Council's resolution backing affirmative action. Since no Princeton student enrolled at the time would have been directly affected by the outcome of Bollinger, just one criterion was used to bring this divisive political issue to referendum: the effect the case could have on the composition of future classes of Princetonians.

That criterion is similarly applicable to Lewis v. Harris because, if the court upholds New Jersey's current definition of marriage, it is very possible that Princeton will fail to attract talented gay students in the future. Throughout the week, I've heard many of my peers question if gay high school students would actually choose their college based on where they could get married. I believe that asking such a question misses the point.

Equality is not about who would choose to exercise the rights guaranteed to them under the law, but rather who possesses those rights to begin with. Right now at the University, gay students do not have the same rights as straight students under New Jersey law. What gay student would choose to go to a school in a state that does not give him or her the same rights as his or her straight peers, especially if the situation is different at our competitor institutions like Harvard and Yale?

Not only does the gay marriage referendum meet the same criterion that the affirmative action referendum met, but it should also be voted on because it directly impacts current Princeton students. While Bollinger wouldn't have affected any student then enrolled at Princeton, Lewis v. Harris has the potential to make currently enrolled Princeton LGBT students equal citizens under New Jersey law. This affects me. As a gay person, under New Jersey law I do not have the ability to make the same choices as my straight peers, whether I want to or not, solely because I chose to go to Princeton rather than Harvard. That is unjust.

In speaking to my classmates about the injustice of New Jersey's marriage law, many have asked why the USG should sign onto this brief since nothing about the organization makes it an expert in the law. We believe such an expertise is not needed. Princeton is home to some of the brightest and most talented students in the world. The USG is the sole organization on campus with the mission to represent those students. In order to fulfill our motto of "Princeton in the nation's service and in the service of all nations," we must use the power of our combined voice as students to speak out on the fundamental injustices of our time, especially those that affect those within the University walls.

During my freshman year, Gay Family Rights Project founder Kjerstin Elmen-Gyrus '04 and I attended a town hall meeting in Trenton to listen to the seven plaintiff couples in the case. After they were finished, Kjerstin and I stood up and announced that we wanted to write an amicus brief on their behalf and that we were from Princeton. As soon as we said "Princeton," the room burst into applause.

Our voice as Princeton students meant something. I believe our combined student voice, speaking through the USG, will mean something in this case and to the equality of every gay student at this school. Christopher Lloyd is the leader of the Princeton Justice Project's Gay Family Rights Project and President of the Class of 2006. He can be reached at clloyd@princeton.edu.