n employed at a [building] associated with [the LDS Church], was discharged because he failed to qualify for a certificate that he was a member of the Church and eligible to attend its temples…[which violated the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964]” (pgh. 1). The outcome of the case, which basically allowed Mr. Mayson to be discriminated against by the LDS, was shocking in many ways. First of all, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (also known as the LDS Church) is a church that would not be thought to be discriminatory as they consider themselves a Christian group which follows the example of Jesus.
On the other hand, the Latter-Day Saints reserve the right to hire whoever they want to hire for their particular position, and since this church is a religious (and therefore, private) organization, it can choose to hire and fire anyone it pleases. There could be a numerous variety of reasons why the LDS Church would have preferred a building engineer who shared the same faith. Perhaps he came into contact with parishioners of the church on a regular basis and it was assumed that if he were Mormon, he would encourage the spirit of kinsmanship through being a fellow Mormon. However, any kind of breaking of the law, whether it be Section 2 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or any other similar law that were to prove he were discriminated against.
This may have made someone like Mr. Mayson. However, this firing of Mr. Mayson because he was not a church member could have interfered with the boundaries of church and state. Living in a secular society, perhaps the LDS wanted everyone who set foot in their buildings to at least believe in their creeds in order to pacify this necessity for having order in their ranks.
To conclude, this is basically a clear, open-and-shut case about the separation of church and state. The LDS Church essentially has the right to hire and fire anyone they want, since this is a nonprofit organization