When we consider the phrase “LGBT community,” we rarely acknowledge that the acronym isn’t entirely inclusive. When used, the term often refers to just gays and lesbians. Bisexuals and those who are pansexual, queer, intersex or asexual are sometimes disregarded members of the LGBT community.

We must realize that many times the fight isn’t for the LGBT community collectively, it’s for L or G or B or T. Very rarely is it all of the above.

Currently, 17 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that prohibit discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation and gender identity, whereas four states have passed laws that only include protections for sexual orientation. Other protections, such as those against hate crimes and bullying, have also been addressed separately over time in terms of sexual orientation and gender identity.

This makes the Employment Non-Discrimination Act particularly interesting: The legislation would implement protections on the federal level in the workplace for gay and transgender individuals, not just one or the other, under the same bill.

ENDA, which has been introduced in every Congressional session, except one, since 1994, passed the Senate last Thursday. The next step is to head over to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where Speaker John Boehner has openly opposed the legislation and has faced pressure from gay-rights advocates and bipartisan lawmakers to put ENDA on the House’s calendar.

Currently, federal law implements employment protections based only on race, religion, gender, national origin, age and disability. Essentially, under current federal law, individuals can be legally fired from their existing job or not hired for a prospective job if they are gay, lesbian or transgender.

However, because of the lackluster federal protections, states and businesses across the country have implemented their own non-discrimination clauses. 

Three of Champaign’s top employers — the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Kraft Foods and Parkland College — already include both sexual orientation and gender identity in their nondiscrimination clauses. In 2006, Illinois passed statewide nondiscrimination legislation protecting employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

But the need for such legislation is questionable to begin with. 

The American standard in the workplace promotes a separation of private and work life, yet employers place personal factors, such as sexual orientation and gender identity, above more important workplace qualities, such as intelligence or aptitude. However, employers will likely continue to discriminate against current and prospective employees based on irrelevant personal matters, and ENDA could allow the employers and employees to focus on what ultimately matters in the workplace: work. 

One group wants the right to love whomever, and the other wants the right to be whomever, but they both want to be treated equally in the workplace. 

On Sept. 5, 1996, ENDA (which then only included sexual orientation) reached the Senate floor for the first time thanks to its sponsor, former U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. It failed 49-50. 

And on Thursday, Nov. 7, ENDA reached the Senate again for the first time since 2007, where it passed 64-32. 

The House only has to look back to Kennedy to see what passing ENDA fundamentally means for the LGBT community and the nation: “The American people believe that people ought to be able to have a job based upon their ability, based on their character, based on their willingness to do a job. And that ought to be the only criteria.”