LGBTQ rights in Oklahoma

Prior to European settlement, several Native American tribes inhabited the region. These peoples had perceptions towards gender and sexuality which differed significantly to that of the Western world. Tribes who were forcibly moved to Oklahoma also have/had such perceptions. Male-bodied individuals who act, behave and dress as women are known as haxu'xan among the Arapaho, he'émáné'e among the Cheyenne, kúsaat among the Pawnee people, and m'netokwe among the Potawatomi, whereas female-bodied individuals who act and live as male are referred to as hetanémáné'e among the Cheyenne. These individuals, nowadays also called "two-spirit", were traditionally regarded as supernatural and blessed by the spirits. In the Omaha-Ponca language, spoken by the Ponca and Omaha peoples, the term mix'uga refers to intersex or transgender people. Literally, the term means "instructed by the moon". Similar terms exist in the Chiwere language, historically spoken by the Missouria, Otoe and Iowa peoples, where it is mixo'ge, and in the now-extinct Kansa language where it is míⁿxoge.{{cn|date=October 2022}}

Upon its creation in 1890, the Oklahoma Territory received Nebraska's criminal code and common law punishing sodomy ("crime against nature"), whether heterosexual or homosexual, with up to a year of imprisonment. The same year, the Oklahoma Territorial Legislature passed a law criminalizing sodomy with a potential sentence of up to 10 years imprisonment. The crime was complete upon penetration only. The law applied to consensual adults and married couples. The first recorded sodomy case occurred in 1917, when a judge ruled in Ex Parte DeFord that fellatio (oral sex) violated the sodomy statute. Likewise, in the 1935 case of Roberts v. State, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals held that cunnilingus was a violation of the law. In 1943, in LeFavour v. State, the same court rejected contentions that the sodomy law applied only to people of the same sex, confirming that it applied universally regardless of sex or sexual orientation.

One of the few court cases to deal with lesbian activity occurred in 1971, in Warner et al v. State. In this case, a married couple were convicted of forcing an Oklahoma City woman to engage in oral sex with each of them. The Court of Criminal Appeals specifically noted that lesbian activity was a violation of the sodomy statute. In 1973, the Court of Criminal Appeals, in Canfield v. State, voted 2–1 to uphold the conviction and sentence of 15 years in jail of Kenneth Canfield for consensual sodomy. The court rejected arguments that the law was an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. In Post v. State (1986), the court ruled that the sodomy law could not be applied to private, consensual adult heterosexual activity. The court did not address homosexual activity in its ruling. In 1990, the court ruled in Virgin v. State that the insertion of a single finger into the rectum did not constitute penetration.{{cite web |last1=Painter |first1=George |title=The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States: Oklahoma |url=http://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/sensibilities/oklahoma.htm#fn2 |website=glapn.org |access-date=16 October 2022}}

In 1997, the Oklahoma Legislature revised parts of the sodomy statute, reducing the penalty to 2 years' imprisonment, a fine of 1,000 U.S. dollars or both. The law was short-lived; in 1999, a new law made same-sex sodomy punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

Same-sex sexual activity has been legal in Oklahoma since 2003, when the United States Supreme Court struck down all state sodomy laws with its ruling in Lawrence v. Texas.{{cite web |url=http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-sodomy-law |title=Oklahoma Sodomy Law |publisher=Human Rights Campaign |date=June 26, 2003 |access-date=November 2, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131104004016/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-sodomy-law |archive-date=November 4, 2013}}

{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Oklahoma}}

In April 2004, the Oklahoma Senate, by a vote of 38 to 7, and the Oklahoma House of Representatives, by a vote of 92 to 4, approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. On November 2, 2004, Oklahoma voters approved Oklahoma Question 711, a constitutional amendment which banned same-sex marriage and any "legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups".{{cite web |url=http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-marriage-relationship-recognition-law |title=Oklahoma Marriage/Relationship Recognition Law |publisher=Hrc.org |date=March 16, 2007 |access-date=November 2, 2013 |archive-date=November 2, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131102194749/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-marriage-relationship-recognition-law |url-status=dead }}CNN: [http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/ballot.measures/ Ballot Measures], accessed May 15, 2011{{cite web|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2014/0114/US-judge-strikes-down-Oklahoma-gay-marriage-ban-as-arbitrary-irrational-video |title=US judge strikes down Oklahoma gay marriage ban as 'arbitrary, irrational' (+video) |publisher=Csmonitor.com |date=2014-01-14 |access-date=2014-06-29}} On January 14, 2014, Judge Terence C. Kern, of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, declared Question 711 unconstitutional. The case, Bishop v. United States (formerly Bishop v. Oklahoma), was stayed pending appeal.[http://prop8legalcommentary.blogspot.com/2009/08/federal-lawsuit-renewed-against.html Federal lawsuit renewed against Oklahoma's constitutional ban of same-sex marriage] Accessed 11 December 2010 A 3-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit heard oral arguments in Bishop on April 17, 2014, and upheld the district court's decision on July 18.{{cite news|last=Associated Press|title=Oklahoma same-sex marriages ruled constitutional for second time|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/18/oklahoma-same-sex-marriage-constitutional|access-date=July 19, 2014|newspaper=The Guardian|date=August 8, 2014}}

On October 6, 2014, the United States Supreme Court turned down Oklahoma's appeal which reinstates the district court's ruling that the state's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. Following the court's rejection of the appeal, the Oklahoma County Court Clerk's Office and others across the state started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.{{cite web | url=http://www.news9.com/story/26718721/same-sex-marriages-legal-underway-in-oklahoma | title=Same-Sex Marriages Legal, Underway In Oklahoma | publisher=News9.com | date=October 6, 2014 | access-date=October 6, 2014 | author=Lowry, Lacie}}

Oklahoma permits adoption by a couple or an unmarried adult without regard to sexual orientation.Human Rights Campaign: [http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-adoption-law Oklahoma Adoption Law] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120725005635/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-adoption-law |date=July 25, 2012 }}, accessed May 15, 2011

In August 2007, years before Oklahoma began allowing same-sex marriage, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Finstuen v. Crutcher ordered Oklahoma to recognize an adoption by a same-sex couple. The child had been born in Oklahoma, and the parents had been married elsewhere. The court ordered Oklahoma to issue a revised birth certificate showing both adoptive parents.[http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/06/06-6213.pdf Finstuen v. Crutcher] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923195840/http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/06/06-6213.pdf |date=September 23, 2015 }} (10th Cir. 2007), accessed July 11, 2011

Oklahoma law allows adoption agencies to choose not to place children in certain homes if it "would violate the agency's written religious or moral convictions or policies."{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/12/us/oklahoma-gay-adoption-bill.html|title=Oklahoma Passes Adoption Law That L.G.B.T. Groups Call Discriminatory|work=The New York Times|date=May 12, 2018|last=Fortin|first=Jacey}}

Lesbian couples can access fertility treatments and in vitro fertilization. Officially, when a child is born via donor insemination and the parents are married, state law recognizes the non-genetic, non-gestational mother as a legal parent.{{cite web |title=Oklahoma's equality profile |url=http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality_maps/profile_state/OK |work=Movement Advancement Project}} However, in 2023, an Oklahoma district judge gave parental rights to a sperm donor and took away those rights from the woman's ex-spouse. The mother's wife had not been mentioned in the contract with the sperm donor, and she had not adopted the child. However, she had been married to the mother at the time of the child's birth, and she had been listed on the birth certificate.{{Cite web |last=Kay |first=Kaitor |date=2023-02-15 |title=Sperm donor granted custody of Oklahoma boy raised by lesbian couple |url=https://www.wfla.com/news/national/sperm-donor-granted-custody-of-oklahoma-boy-raised-by-lesbian-couple/ |access-date=2023-02-15 |website=WFLA |language=en-US}}

While there are no specific surrogacy laws in Oklahoma, courts recognize the legal validity of surrogacy contracts (gestational or traditional), without regard to the partners' genders. A traditional contract may increase the risk of legal conflict or litigation.{{cite web |title=What You Need to Know About Surrogacy in Oklahoma |url=https://www.americansurrogacy.com/surrogacy/oklahoma-surrogacy-laws |website=American Surrogacy}}

{{Further|LGBT employment discrimination in the United States}}

[[File:Oklahoma counties and cities with sexual orientation and gender identity protection.svg|thumb|right|300px|Map of Oklahoma cities that had sexual orientation and/or gender identity anti–employment discrimination ordinances prior to Bostock

{{legend|#800080|Sexual orientation and gender identity in both public and private employment}}

{{legend|#00ffff|Sexual orientation in public employment}}

{{legend|#d0d0d0|Does not protect sexual orientation and gender identity in employment}}]]

Oklahoma statutes do not address discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation.Human Rights Campaign: [http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-non-discrimination-law1 Oklahoma Non-Discrimination Law] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120725005651/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-non-discrimination-law1 |date=July 25, 2012 }}, accessed May 15, 2011

The city of Norman has a nondiscrimination policy that prohibits discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity,{{cite web |author1=Jane Glenn Cannon |title=Norman City Council affirms LGBT rights |url=https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/2015/12/22/norman-city-council-affirms-lgbt-rights/60702319007/ |website=The Oklahoman |access-date=19 March 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240319113801/https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/2015/12/22/norman-city-council-affirms-lgbt-rights/60702319007/ |archive-date=19 March 2024 |date=22 December 2015}}{{cite web | title=Municipal Equality Index | url=http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/MEI_2013_report.pdf | publisher=Human Rights Campaign | access-date=November 21, 2013 | archive-date=December 2, 2013 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202231201/http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/MEI_2013_report.pdf | url-status=dead }} while the cities of Edmond,[https://www.hrc.org/resources/mei-2017-see-your-citys-score MEI 2017: See Your City’s Score] Oklahoma City and Tulsa have nondiscrimination policies that prohibit discrimination in public employment (i.e. city employees only) on account of sexual orientation.{{cite news|url=http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=12665091|title=Tulsa City Council Approves Sexual Orientation Policy; Rejects Immigration Ordinance|first=Emory|last=Bryan|publisher=News on 6|date=June 18, 2010|access-date=May 25, 2013}}{{cite news|url=http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-council-passes-sexual-orientation-measure/article/3623597|title=Oklahoma City Council passes sexual orientation measure|first=Michael|last=Kimball|newspaper=The Oklahoman|date=November 16, 2011|access-date=May 25, 2013}}

{{main|Bostock v. Clayton County}}

On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County, consolidated with Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that discrimination in the workplace on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is discrimination on the basis of sex, and Title VII therefore protects LGBT employees from discrimination.{{cite web|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-expanding-gay-rights/index.html|title=Two conservative justices joined decision expanding LGBTQ rights|website=CNN|date=June 16, 2020|last=Biskupic|first=Joan}}{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53055632|title=US Supreme Court backs protection for LGBT workers|website=BBC News|date=June 15, 2020}}{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/15/us/gay-transgender-workers-supreme-court.html|title=Civil Rights Law Protects Gay and Transgender Workers, Supreme Court Rules|website=The New York Times|date=June 15, 2020|last=Liptak|first=Adam}}

In Norman, conversion therapy has been banned since July 2021, making it the first city within Oklahoma to ban conversion therapy.{{Cite web|url=https://www.newson6.com/story/60dc5b07423b1e2501b70459/norman-city-council-votes-to-ban-conversion-therapy-|title = Norman City Council Votes to Ban Conversion Therapy|author=Brooke Griffin|date=June 30, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210710204735/https://www.newson6.com/story/60dc5b07423b1e2501b70459/norman-city-council-votes-to-ban-conversion-therapy-|archive-date=July 10, 2021|website=Newson6.com}}

State law does not address hate crimes based on gender identity or sexual orientation.{{cite web| publisher=Human Rights Campaign | url=http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/oklahoma-hate-crimes-law | title=Oklahoma Hate Crimes Law | access-date= May 15, 2011}} However, since the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act was signed into law in October 2009, federal law has provided additional penalties for crimes motivated by the victim's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. Hate crimes against LGBTQ people can be prosecuted in federal court.

{{see|Transgender rights in the United States}}

Transgender rights within Oklahoma remained mostly unaddressed until Kevin Stitt was elected as governor of Oklahoma. Since taking office in 2019, he has consistently acted against transgender rights.

In August 2023, Stitt signed into law an executive order "explicitly defin[ing] male and female as biological sexes assigned at birth".{{cite web | url=https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/08/oklahoma-gov-signs-executive-order-defining-male-female-as-sex-assigned-at-birth/ | title=Oklahoma Gov. Signs executive order defining male & female as sex assigned at birth | date=August 2, 2023 }} This applies for all state and legal purposes, including using bathrooms and changing rooms in state-owned facilities, playing sports, living in domestic violence shelters, receiving assistance from rape crisis centers, incarceration, and the collection of statistics.{{Cite news |title=Transgender rights targeted in executive order signed by Oklahoma governor |work=AP |url=https://apnews.com/article/transgender-rights-oklahoma-governor-67dc0c4a9d769066ccb1b9835c71449f}}{{Cite news |title=Oklahoma Executive Order enacts 'Women's Bill of Rights,' critics call it 'transmisogyny' |work=KOSU (NPR) |url=https://www.kosu.org/health/2023-08-01/oklahoma-executive-order-enacts-womens-bill-of-rights-critics-call-it-transmisogyny}}{{Cite news |title=Oklahoma gov. signs 'Women's Bill of Rights' into law to protect girls from 'out of control gender ideology' |work=FOX |url=https://www.foxnews.com/media/oklahoma-gov-signs-womens-bill-rights-law-protect-girls-control-gender-ideology}}

{{see also|Oklahoma Senate Bill 1100}}

Previously, the Office of Vital Records altered the marker on the birth certificate of a transgender person upon receipt of a court order. Transgender Oklahomans could also change the gender marker on a driver's license by submitting to the Department of Public Safety a notarized statement from a physician confirming that they had undergone "permanent and irreversible" transition.

In October 2021, Oklahoma became the 14th US state to allow a "non-binary option" on a birth certificate by a court order resulting from Kit Vivien Loreleid v. Oklahoma State Department of Health.{{Cite web |date=October 22, 2021 |title=Oklahoma issues first nonbinary birth certificate |url=https://www.kosu.org/local-news/2021-10-22/oklahoma-issues-first-nonbinary-birth-certificate}}{{Cite web |title=Movement Advancement Project | Identity Document Laws and Policies |url=https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/identity_document_laws/birth_certificate}}

In November 2021, Governor Stitt signed an executive order which blocked the Oklahoma State Department of Health from issuing any change to the gender marker on a birth certificate.{{cite report |url=https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/executive/2014.pdf |title=Executive Order 2021-24 |author=Governor of Oklahoma |access-date=2022-11-23}}

In April 2022, the Oklahoma Legislature passed Senate Bill 1100 to only allow sex markers of either male or female explicitly listed on birth certificates issued within Oklahoma and also legally ban “any other sex markers”. The Governor of Oklahoma signed the bill into law, effective immediately with an "emergency clause".{{cite web |title=Human Rights Campaign Condemns Governor Stitt for Signing Anti-Equality Legislation |date=April 26, 2022 |url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/human-rights-campaign-condemns-governor-stitt-for-signing-anti-equality-legislation}}{{Cite web |title=Senate Bill Related to Sex Designation on Birth Certificate Passes State House |url=https://www.newson6.com/story/626190f9dbadd6070acb79cf/senate-bill-related-to-sex-designation-on-birth-certificate-passes-state-house}}{{Cite web |title=Bill Information |url=http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=sb1100&Session=2200}}{{cite web |date=April 27, 2022 |title=Oklahoma governor signs law banning nonbinary birth certificates |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/26/politics/oklahoma-nonbinary-gender-marker-birth-certificate/index.html |website=CNN}}

In March 2022, Stitt signed a bill that passed the Oklahoma Legislature preventing transgender women and girls from competing on women and girls' athletic teams at public schools and universities.{{Cite web |last=Cole |first=Devan |date=30 March 2022 |title=Oklahoma becomes fourth state to enact anti-trans sports ban this year |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/oklahoma-anti-trans-sports-bill/index.html |access-date=2022-03-30 |website=CNN}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/oklahoma-governor-signs-transgender-sports-ban-rcna22210|title = Oklahoma governor signs transgender sports ban|website = NBC News| date=March 30, 2022 }}

In April 2023, a bill passed the Oklahoma Legislature that explicitly legally bans any gender-affirming healthcare practices on minors. Governor Stitt signed the bill into law in May 2023, making Oklahoma the 16th state to restrict such care for minors.{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=2023-04-26 |title=Human Rights Campaign Condemns Oklahoma House for Passing Gender Affirming Care Ban |url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/human-rights-campaign-condemns-oklahoma-house-for-passing-gender-affirming-care-ban-2 |access-date=2023-05-02 |website=Human Rights Campaign |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=2023-05-02 |title=Oklahoma SB613 |url=https://legiscan.com/OK/bill/SB613/2023 |access-date=2023-05-02 |website=Legiscan |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=2023-04-26 |title=Human Rights Campaign Condemns Oklahoma Senate for Passing Gender Affirming Care Ban |url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/human-rights-campaign-condemns-oklahoma-senate-for-passing-gender-affirming-care-ban-urges-governor-stitt-to-veto |access-date=2023-05-02 |website=Human Rights Campaign |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=2023-05-02 |title=Oklahoma governor signs gender-affirming care ban for kids |url=https://apnews.com/article/oklahoma-transgender-medical-care-children-9b9ed20596bc9458df56832dcec13e65 |access-date=2023-05-02 |website=AP News |language=en-US}}{{cite web | url=https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/05/oklahoma-makes-it-a-felony-for-doctors-to-provide-gender-affirming-care-to-trans-youth/ | title=Oklahoma makes it a felony for doctors to provide gender-affirming care to trans youth | date=May 2, 2023 }}{{cite web | url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/human-rights-campaign-condemns-oklahoma-governor-stitt-for-signing-gender-affirming-care-ban-into-law | title=Human Rights Campaign Condemns Oklahoma Governor Stitt for Signing Gender-Affirming Care Ban into Law | date=May 2, 2023 }} In October 2023, a judge declined to stop it from taking effect.{{Cite web |last=Murphy |first=Sean |date=2023-10-07 |title=Federal Judge Allows Oklahoma Ban On Gender-Affirming Care For Minors To Take Effect |url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/judge-allows-gender-affirming-care-ban-for-minors-to-take-effect-oklahoma_n_6521ade8e4b0a32c15bec53a |access-date=2023-10-08 |website=HuffPost |language=en}}

In February 2023, the Oklahoma House passed a bill to ban any entity which receives public funding from providing or allowing its members to provide gender-affirming healthcare to a transgender person of any age, and to ban insurance providers from covering it, while altogether banning such care for minors.{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=2023-02-28 |title=House passes bill banning gender transition services for minors in Oklahoma |url=https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-house-passes-hb-2177-gender-transition-services-minors-ban/43123692 |access-date=2023-03-01 |website=KOCO |language=en-US}}{{Cite act|type=House Bill|index=2177|date=28 February 2023|legislature=Oklahoma State Legislature|url=https://legiscan.com/OK/text/HB2177/id/2709003/Oklahoma-2023-HB2177-Comm_Sub.pdf}} However, this bill was not voted upon by the Senate during the 2023 legislative session, and thus did not become law.

In October 2022, Stitt signed a bill into law that passed the Oklahoma Legislature will legally ban any government funding of Oklahoma hospitals - that provide any "gender transition services" to minors (similar to banning government funding abortions within Oklahoma hospitals since 1997).{{cite news |last1=Weger |first1=Haley |date=4 October 2022 |title=GOV. STITT SIGNS BILL OUTLAWING GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE AT OU CHILDREN'S |work=News On 6 |publisher=Griffin Media |url=https://www.newson6.com/story/633c8595bd6dae7ed224874e/gov-stitt-signs-bill-outlawing-genderaffirming-care-at-ou-childrens- |access-date=27 April 2023}}

In 2018, a local school in Achille had to shut down for a few days due to safety concerns after a 12-year-old transgender student received death threats and threats of mutilation, whipping and castration by her classmates' parents.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/15/us/transgender-oklahoma-school-bullying.html |title=Transgender Girl, 12, Is Violently Threatened After Facebook Post by Classmate's Parent|newspaper=The New York Times|date=August 15, 2018}}

File:Tulsa Pride 2017.jpg

Oklahoma has a "no promo homo law" in place that forbids the "promotion of homosexuality" in schools and instructs HIV-related education to teach students that not "engaging in homosexual activity" prevents the spread of the HIV virus.{{cite web|url=https://www.lambdalegal.org/dont-erase-us/laws|title=State Anti-LGBT Curriculum Laws|work=Lambda Legal}}

In April 2021, the Oklahoma Legislature passed a bill legally banning any diversity training. The Governor of Oklahoma Kevin Stitt signed the bill into law effective immediately.{{Cite web|url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/oklahoma-gov-kevin-stitt-signs-discriminatory-diversity-training-ban-into-law|title=Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt Signs Discriminatory Diversity Training Ban into Law|date=May 10, 2021 }}{{Cite web|url=https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/oklahoma-state-legislature-sends-discriminatory-diversity-training-ban-to-governor-stitts-desk|title = Oklahoma State Legislature Sends Discriminatory Diversity Training Ban to Governor Stitt's Desk| date=April 29, 2021 }}

In late 2021, state Sen. Rob Standridge introduced a bill (SB 1141) that would permit students in public universities to avoid any courses “addressing any form of gender, sexual, or racial diversity, equality, or inclusion curriculum” (as described by the Oklahoma Senate's press release) unless the course is required for their major. Standridge claimed that schools are "trying to indoctrinate students".{{Cite web |title=Standridge files bills to address indoctrination in Oklahoma schools {{!}} Oklahoma Senate |url=https://oksenate.gov/press-releases/standridge-files-bills-address-indoctrination-oklahoma-schools |access-date=2022-03-09 |website=oksenate.gov |date=December 16, 2021 |language=en}}

Proposed legislation to institute in the Oklahoma National Guard a local version of "Don't ask, don't tell" (DADT), the federal policy that formerly prohibited gays, lesbians and bisexuals from serving openly in the U.S. military, was proposed in January 2012 and withdrawn in February.{{cite news | work=Military.com | url=http://www.military.com/news/article/bill-would-reintroduce-dadt-to-oklahoma-guard.html | title= Bill Would Reintroduce DADT to Oklahoma Guard | date=January 10, 2012 | access-date=February 22, 2012}}{{cite news | work=Military.com | url=http://www.military.com/news/article/dadt-bill-apparently-shelved-in-oklahoma-house.html | title=DADT Bill Apparently Shelved in Oklahoma House | date=February 21, 2012 |access-date=February 22, 2012}}

Following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in United States v. Windsor in June 2013 invalidating Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act,legal citation as 570 U.S.___ (2013) the U.S. Department of Defense issued directives requiring state units of the National Guard to enroll the same-sex spouses of guard members in federal benefit programs. Guard officials in Oklahoma enrolled some same-sex couples until September 5, 2013, when Governor Fallin ordered an end to the practice.{{cite news|title=Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin tells National Guard to deny same-sex benefits |url=http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/oklahoma-gov-mary-fallin-tells-national-guard-deny-same-sex-benefits-article-1.1459677|access-date=December 3, 2013|newspaper=New York Daily News|date=September 18, 2013}} Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on October 31 said he would insist on compliance.{{cite news|last=Johnson|first=Chris|title=Hagel to direct nat'l guards to offer same-sex benefits|url=http://www.washingtonblade.com/2013/10/31/pentagon-direct-natl-guards-offer-sex-benefits/|access-date=December 3, 2013|newspaper=Washington Blade|date=October 31, 2013}} On November 6, Fallin announced that members of the Oklahoma National Guard could apply for benefits for same-sex partners at federally owned ONG facilities, where most staffers are federal employees, and at federal military installations.{{cite news|last=Allen|first=Silas |title=Oklahoma National Guard will process same-sex spouse benefits at a few federal facilities|url=http://newsok.com/oklahoma-national-guard-will-process-same-sex-spouse-benefits-at-a-few-federal-facilities/article/3901831|access-date=December 3, 2013 |newspaper=NewsOK|date=November 7, 2013}} When DoD officials objected to that plan, Fallin ordered that all married couples, opposite-sex or same-sex, would be required to have benefits requests processed at those facilities.{{cite news|last=Mills|first=Russell |title=Fallin: OK will no longer process benefits for National Guard couples|url=http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/fallin-ok-will-no-longer-process-benefits-national/nbydX/|access-date=February 14, 2014|newspaper=KRMG|date=November 20, 2013}}

A 2022 Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) poll found that 54% of Oklahomans supported same-sex marriage, while 44% were opposed. 2% were undecided. Additionally, 65% supported an anti-discrimination law covering sexual orientation and gender identity. 30% were against. The PRRI also found that 40% were against allowing public businesses to refuse to serve LGBTQ people due to religious beliefs, while 50% supported such religiously based refusals.[https://ava.prri.org/#lgbt/2022/States/srvref/m/US-OK PRRI: American Values Atlas 2022]

• Cimarron Alliance Foundation
• National Gay Task Force v. Board of Education
• No promo homo laws

{{notelist}}

{{reflist|30em}}

• [http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/Bishop_vs_Oklahoma_Opinion_01142014.pdf Bishop v. United States, January 14, 2014] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140123031019/http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/Bishop_vs_Oklahoma_Opinion_01142014.pdf |date=January 23, 2014 }}

{{LGBT rights in the United States}}

Category:LGBTQ rights in Oklahoma