Tuesday, the California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the historic marriage cases challenging the constitutionality of state marriage laws that discriminate against same-sex couples. The justices will hear three hours of argument, and will have 90 days to deliberate a ruling.

Regardless the Supreme Court’s ruling, so-called “family-friendly” organizations have launched aggressive campaigns to qualify a ballot initiative amending the state constitution and banning same-sex marriage for the November election.

The San Diego LGBT Community Center and statewide organizations are working overtime to combat signature gatherers’ deceitful efforts (some have misrepresented themselves to trick people into signing).

It’s important our community knows the tactics our opponents are using. Likewise, it’s important we know who’s funding the organizations attempting to bolster our quest for equality.

On the Secretary of State’s Web site, under a link to campaign finance, readers can search committees and proponents of the constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

ProtectMarriage.com and VoteYesMarriage.com are registered, active organizations on the Web site, and readers can research who has contributed money to the organizations’ efforts.

By and large, Christian- or “family”-based organizations have backed the committees, but the lists of donors also include realtors, small business owners and development companies.

We are tasked with doing our research. As the Greater San Diego Business Association says, “Friends do business with friends.”

Supporters of the same-sex marriage ban are well within their rights to contribute to the campaigns of these organizations – and we’re well within ours to decline doing business with them.

Similarly, visits to the ProtectMarriage.com and VoteYesMarriage.com sites allow readers to peruse a list of endorsements. Those endorsing the constitutional amendment include business owners, pastors and (largely) Republican elected officials.

It’s our duty to educate ourselves on who our opponents are. Phone calls, letters or e-mails may not sway elected officials into switching their position on the amendment, but in large numbers, they will send a clear message.

Likewise, a letter to a local business owner explaining why you’ll no longer do business with them will send a message. In all likelihood, you know someone contributing to these campaigns, or you do business with someone who is a contributor. It’s time they know how their contributions affect our battle for basic, constitutional rights. Your money can no longer go toward contributors who funnel dollars into discriminatory practices.

As lawyers for the City of San Francisco and the same-sex couples prepare for Tuesday’s arguments, we need look no further to justify our fight for equality than a recent report from a New Jersey commission.

According to The Associated Press, the commission was established to study the state’s same-sex civil unions, and has found the marriage alternative creates a “second-class” status for same-sex couples, rather than giving them equality.

Though the report does not advocate allowing same-sex marriage, it outlines a laundry list of complications same-sex couples in New Jersey face – complications, notably, not faced by couples in Massachusetts, the only state that allows same-sex marriage.

In 2006, New Jersey became the third state to offer civil unions.

The report on civil unions reminds us why we must continue to educate ourselves and others regarding full equality.