LGBT Employment Nondiscrimination: Debating Sexuality and Citizenship

Introduction: Nebraska is 1 of 26 states that did not protect LGBT people from employment discrimination prior to Bostock vs. Clayton County. This article examines debates in Nebraska about LGBT employment nondiscrimination as a window into how citizenship is defined in relation to sexuality and gender identity. Methods: We performed qualitative analyses on (1) the 2018 Nebraska Annual Social Indicators Survey of 902 respondents who shared their opinions on employment nondiscrimination legislation for LGBT individuals in close- and open-ended questions and (2) transcripts of the 2017 Nebraska state legislature debate of a bill that would have added sexual orientation and gender identity to the classes protected from employment discrimination. Results: We find overlap in the primary frames employed by advocates and opponents. Both frame sexuality and gender as irrelevant to employment, and both rely on fairness and equality as rationales. Both sides also use a morality frame; however, those opposing argue that passage may result in discrimination based on religion. Conclusions: While civil rights are often assumed to be conferred on all people designated as citizens in a society, this paper reveals that LGBT people’s inclusion in the state remains contested. Both sides articulate that the state is not neutral but is expected to be an enforcer of values through policies implicating gender and sexuality. Policy Implications: Because LGBT nondiscrimination policies tap into broader debates over freedom, morality, and citizenship, these will likely continue to be contested in the years following the Supreme Court’s ruling that protects against employment discrimination.

这篇文章探讨了内布拉斯加州关于LGBT就业歧视保护的辩论，旨在揭示在Bostock诉Clayton县案之前，LGBT群体是否受到就业歧视保护的议题，反映出公民身份在性别认同和性取向方面的定义。这一研究关注性别认同和性取向如何与公民身份相关联，特别是在没有全面保护LGBT群体的就业权益的背景下。

本研究采用了定性分析方法，分析了两组数据：（1）2018年内布拉斯加州年度社会指标调查的902名受访者的意见，这些受访者在闭合式和开放式问题中表达了他们对LGBT群体就业歧视立法的看法；（2）2017年内布拉斯加州立法机构关于一项法案的辩论记录，该法案旨在将性取向和性别认同纳入就业歧视保护类别。

这项研究发现，支持者和反对者在关于LGBT就业反歧视立法的主要论点上存在重叠。双方都认为性取向和性别认同与就业无关，并且都以公平和平等作为立法的理性依据。然而，双方也使用了道德框架，其中反对者认为该法案通过后可能会导致宗教自由方面的歧视。通过对内布拉斯加州LGBT就业反歧视辩论的分析，研究揭示了LGBT群体的包容性在国家层面仍然是一个有争议的话题。无论是支持者还是反对者，都认为国家不应保持中立，而应通过实施影响性别和性取向的政策来维护某些社会价值观。研究表明，LGBT反歧视政策涉及自由、道德和公民身份等更广泛的争议，因此这些问题将继续在最高法院裁定就业歧视后成为未来的持续争论点。