Skip to main content
Log in

Believing in employment discrimination: The case of Forrest Mims,Scientific American, and title VII protection

  • Articles
  • Published:
Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article reviews the law regarding Title VII employment discrimination protection from religious discrimination. The issues surrounding the principal legal protection in this regard are explored in the context of a recent controversial case in which an author, Forrest Mims, was not hired as a regular contributor forScientific American magazine, ostensibly because of his belief in the theory of creation over the theory of evolution. The definition of what constitutes a protected religious belief or practice is seen to have expanded over time. However, a belief in creationism is not necessarily seen as being tantamount to a religious belief under present legal interpretation of Title VII. The implications of this finding for future needed Title VII revision are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ansonia Board of Education v. Ronald Philbrook, 107 S.Ct. 367 (1986).

  • Apes and apostates (1990).The Economist 303(7504), 33–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner v. Diagnostic Center Hospital, 671 F2d 141 (5th Cir. 1982).

  • Brierton, T. D. (1988). Religious discrimination in the workplace: Who's accommodating who?Labor Law Journal, 39(5), 299–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claybaugh v. Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co., 355 F. Supp. 1 (D.Or. 1973).

  • Crossfire (Cable News Network broadcast, October 31, 1990).

  • Cummins v. Parker Seal Co., 433 US 903 (1977).

  • Davis, B. (1990).Scientific American drops plans to hire columnist who believes in creationism.The Wall Street Journal, (October 22, 1990), A7A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis v. Beason, 133 US 33 (1890).

  • deCamp, L. S. (1968).The Great Monkey Trial. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diaz v. Pan American Airways, 442 F2d 385 (5th Cir. 1971).

  • Dong Shik Kim, et al. v. The Dekalb Farmer's Market, No. 1-88CV2767HTW (N.D. Ga. 1988).

  • Eastland, T. (1991).Scientific American on trial.The American Spectator, 24(2), 32–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards v. Aguillard, 479 US 1004, 93 LE 2d 697 (1987).

  • Fekito v. Standard Brands, Inc., 424 F2d 331 (3rd Cir. 1970).

  • Feldestein v. The Christian Science Monitor, 30 FEP 1842 (E.D. Mass. 1983).

  • Flygare, T.L. (1987). Supreme Court strikes down Louisiana creationism act.Phi Delta Kappan, 69(1), 77–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, v. Rhode Island, 345 US 67 (1953).

  • Ginger, R. (1958).Six Days or Forever? Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1988). Genesis and genealogy: Are you interested in the rock of ages, or the age of rocks?Natural History, 97(9), 12–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • In the beginning God created... (1990).The Economist,312(7616), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, E. P., & Aalberts, R. J. (1990). Americans with Disabilities Act: Undue hardship for private sector employers?Labor Law Journal 41(10), 675–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kern v. Dynaelectron Corp., 577 F. Supp. 1196 (N.D. Tex. 1983).

  • Mims, F. M., III. (1990a). Sunspots and how to observe them safely.Scientific American, 262(6), 130–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Mims, F. M., III. (1990b). How to monitor ultraviolet radiation from the sun.Scientific American, 263(2), 106–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mims, F. M., III. (1990c). A remote-control camera that catches the wind and captures the landscape.Scientific American, 263(4), 126–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, C. E. (1990). New age training programs: In violation of relgious discrimination laws?Labor Law Journal, 41(7), 410–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mormon Church v. Amos. 107 S.Ct. 2862 (1987).

  • No religion here (1990).New Scientist 128(1743), 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pullum, S. J. (1988). Some principles concerning religious discrimination in the workplace.SAM Advanced Management Journal, 53(1), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmond v. GAF Corporation, 1574 F2d 897 (7th Cir. 1978).

  • Science's litmus test (1991).Harper's Magazine,282(1960), 28–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scopes v. State, 154 Tenn. 105, 289 S.W. 363 (1927).

  • Sharpe, P. (1991). Big bang.Texas Monthly, 19(1), 40–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidey, K. (1990).Scientific American drops Christian writer with creation beliefs.Christianity Today, 34(17), 36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audra Sommers, a/k/a Timothy K. Cornish v. Budget Marketing, 667 F2d 748 (8th Cir. 1982).

  • Theriault v. Carlson, 495 F2d 390 (5th Cir. 1974).

  • Trans World Airlines v. Hardison, 432 US 63 (1977).

  • Turpen v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railway Co., 736 F.2d. 1022 (4th Cir. 1984).

  • Ulane v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 742 F.2d. 1081 (4th Cir. 1984).

  • United States v. Seeger, 380 US 163 (1965.).

  • Weisberg, J. (1990). No-run homer.The New Republic, 203(22), 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, X. (1982). Balanced treatment for creation science and evolution science in public school instruction.Act. La. Rev. Stat. Ann., 17, 286.1–17.286.7

    Google Scholar 

  • Yott v. North American Rockwell Corp, 502 F2d 398 (1974).

  • Young. V. Southwestern Savings & Loan Ass'n., 509 F2d 496 (5th Cir. 1975).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wyld, D.C., Cappel, S.D. Believing in employment discrimination: The case of Forrest Mims,Scientific American, and title VII protection. Employ Respons Rights J 5, 1–11 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01407804

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01407804

Key Words

Navigation