A bill floating around Missouri's Capitol could create a statewide non-discrimination policy that bars businesses, landlords or banks from discriminating against someone because of his or her sexual orientation.
While public schools are not explicitly stated in the bills, Missouri's 518 public districts employ thousands of people who could benefit from the bill.
Otto Fagen, legislative director for the Missouri National Education Association (MNEA), testified in favor of Senate Bill 653, which would bar discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, during a January committee hearing for the bill.
"I don't know how many school districts have non-discrimination policies that include LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) people, but I would be surprised if it's the majority," Fagen said. "I think we (the MNEA) regard it as important that it passes. It seems to have support in the Senate, but it's never made it all the way."
The Missouri School Boards' Association - a private, nonprofit organization that assists school boards with board member training, policy support, legal assistance and other services - does not specifically track which districts include sexual orientation in their employee non-discrimination policies.
However, Kelli Hopkins, MSBA associate executive director, said it is not typical for districts to include sexual orientation in their policies.
Some cities and counties have created their own ordinances prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, but neither Cole County nor Jefferson City has any such ordinance.
The county doesn't have the jurisdiction to create human rights ordinances. Jefferson City could create a sexual orientation non-discrimination ordinance with approval from the City Council; however, the city has not done so because any violations would go through the municipal court.
City Attorney Drew Hilpert maintains the municipal court is not the best venue for enforcement because it cannot award any damages - it can only issue fines or jail time.
So in Jefferson City and Cole County, it's up to individual businesses, organizations and schools whether to include sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policies.
Jefferson City Public Schools and the Blair Oaks School District both added sexual orientation clauses in recent years.
The JCPS school board adopted a revision to the employee non-discrimination policy in January 2011 to include sexual orientation, said Penney Rector, assistant to the superintendent for human resources.
"The school district is an equal opportunity employer and strives to support and respect students and employees," she said.
Blair Oaks added sexual orientation to its policy in 2010, said Superintendent Jim Jones.
"We want to maintain a learning environment that's free from harassment," Jones said. "I think a lot of these things aren't necessarily a new topic. Recent publicity has made it a hot topic. We want not just students, but teachers, to have a safe and secure learning environment."
The bills do not address students attending public schools. Students are protected by Title IX, which was amended in 1972 to protect people from gender discrimination in education programs or activities.
While the law does not specifically include sexual orientation, courts have upheld it as part of gender non-discrimination.
A California state district judge recently ruled in favor of two former players on the Pepperdine University women's basketball team who alleged the university discriminated against them because they were dating, according to a Los Angeles Times article. The judge ruled sexual orientation applies to Title IX and is included in the gender clause of non-discrimination.
Blair Oaks and JCPS have clauses in their student policies prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Members of the student Gay/Straight Alliance club at the Jefferson City High School said they were not surprised but a little disappointed Missouri doesn't have a statewide policy against LGBT discrimination.
The 10th-grade students are only a couple years from being part of the workforce, renters or loan-seekers, where they could potentially face discrimination.
One of those students, Puja Halder, said she recently realized her sexuality spans past being attracted only to males. While she is still unsure of where she falls on the sexuality spectrum, she said she better identifies as pansexual, which is defined as being attracted to men, women and people who don't identify with a specific gender.
"Your personal life shouldn't be a factor (for employment)," Halder said. "Someone who's straight and married wouldn't be fired. It's ridiculous."
Student Sophie Patterson said she has heard the argument LGBT people shouldn't bring their personal lives into the workplace. However, she sees the situation a little differently.
If someone is fired from employment because they identify as LGBT, then it's the employer who is bringing his or her personal beliefs into the equation, Patterson said. She argues employers shouldn't be able to discriminate against LGBT people because of their religion or personal biases.
The students felt some discrimination stems from being uneducated about differences in sexuality, and including a sexual orientation non-discrimination clause isn't creating special privileges for LGBT people but creating protection and a wider window of equality.
"I think it starts at home," Halder said. "(Sexuality) was never a dividing factor in my family. They taught acceptance and kindness to everyone."
Forms of this bill have been presented to the Legislature since 1998, said the bill's sponsor Sen. Joseph Keaveny, D-St. Louis, and it could have trouble passing again this year.
Being an election year, legislators are more likely to lean tightly with their political parties, making it more difficult to pass bills like this one, he said.
Keaveny said he is ready to soldier on if the bill is swatted down again this year, though. He said he knows it will pass at some point and he will continue fighting for it for as long as it takes.