[VeniVidiVici]

Does anybody READ articles anymore, before making judgmental comments about them? Or has that tedious practice gone out of fashion on FR?

The school has NOT said she can’t wear a crucifix. In fact, they’ve invited her to wear one on the outside of her clothing. Really, *read* and you’ll understand

Granted I'm a bit tired so my reading comprehension may be a bit off, but I cannot find anything to support your argument that the school is allowing the wearing of the cross. If you could point out the relevant passages for that, I'd be much obliged.

[GovernmentShrinker]

The letter to Mrs Grimshaw-Brown said: 'The prospectus makes clear that jewellery may not be worn except for earrings and watches. 'This is because there have been incidents in schools where hooped earrings, bracelets and necklaces have caused injuries to children when caught in outdoor play or physical activity. 'The prospectus makes it clear that school will allow jewellery where it is a necessary part of the religious faith of the child, i.e. Sikh families must wear bangles as one of the "five Ks", the religious rules for dress.' . . . 'We do want children to be proud of their Christian faith, therefore we would like to encourage them to wear crosses,' she added. 'The best solution in this case for children to be kept safe would be for pupils to wear a brooch - in fact some children already do.'