As New Jersey lawmakers consider how to grant full marriage rights to same-sex couples, they’ll surely be looking north for lessons.

Specifically, they’ll look to Massachusetts, the only state that allows same-sex marriage, and to Vermont, the state with the longest experience offering civil unions.

“I think we will look to both [states], particularly to Vermont with civil unions,” said state Sen. Loretta Weinberg, D-Bergen. “And we’d be foolish not to.”

In a ruling last month, the New Jersey Supreme Court declared unanimously that same-sex couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual ones. By a 4-3 margin, justices gave lawmakers 180 days to “either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or create a parallel statutory structure” that gives same-sex couples all the privileges and obligations married couples have.

The ruling is similar to the 1999 high-court ruling in Vermont that led the state to create civil unions, which confer all of the rights and benefits available to married couples under state law.

Top New Jersey lawmakers have indicated the Garden State’s same-sex marriage mechanism will likely take the form of civil unions.

Since they were approved by Vermont lawmakers in 2000, more than 8,000 couples have received civil unions from the state of Vermont, about 85 percent of them involving couples who do not live in the state.

The high court in Massachusetts ruled in 2003 that same-sex marriage should be legalized. The next year, the state began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples; so far, more than 8,000 have been issued, mostly to Massachusetts couples.

Opinions vary on how same-sex unions have changed life in Massachusetts and Vermont.

“I don’t think it’s [civil unions] changed Vermont one diddly-squat,” said Clyde Jenne, the town clerk in Hartland, Vt. “We didn’t fall off the face of the earth.”

Others who oppose same-sex unions say the practice has caused problems.

In Vermont, civil unions have led people with liberal views to more aggressively promote their beliefs, said Steve Cable, president of the anti-civil union group Vermont Renewal.

“People who hold traditional views here are literally being oppressed,” Cable said. “A kid says, ‘I don’t know if I agree with this,’ and they get ganged up on by other kids as well as teachers, who say, ‘This is law.’”

In both states, opponents of same-sex unions claim schools are “indoctrinating children” with a message that families headed by same-sex couples are normal.

David Parker, a scientist who lives in Lexington, Mass., is part of a lawsuit that seeks to force schools to notify parents and give them a chance to have their young children opt out of lessons that deal with homosexuality.

Parker was arrested last year for refusing to leave his 6-year-old son’s school after officials would not meet his demand that he be notified when homosexuality was going to be discussed in his son’s class.

“It is an indoctrination process. I’m talking about young children,” he said. “We’re not talking about high school students here.”

In Massachusetts, fallout from same-sex marriage prompted Catholic Charities of Boston to get out of the adoption business. Church officials said they could not reconcile adopting children into homes with same-sex parents with Roman Catholic beliefs.

Both states have seen political ramifications from same-sex marriage legislation.

In Vermont, 18 lawmakers who supported the unions were replaced by conservatives who did not, and Republicans took control of the Legislature. Four years later, though, Democrats were back in charge.

Massachusetts lawmakers voted 16 times on various measures about whether to ask voters if they support amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage in the future. So far, none of the lawmakers who have voted against the amendment have lost re-election bids.

But Kristian Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, said that could change Nov. 7, when lawmakers are up for election again.

Soon after that election, another legislative vote is expected on whether to put the amendment on the 2008 ballot.

Mineau scoffs at the notion that the same-sex marriage question is no longer a priority for most people in the state. A state-record 170,000 residents signed the petition seeking the public vote.

Vermont couples with civil unions and same-sex Massachusetts couples with marriages have all the rights their states offer marriages performed between men and women.

But neither state’s recognition applies nationally. So couples in both states must file federal tax returns as singles. And if one partner dies, the other won’t get federal Social Security payments.