UK: Schoolgirl goes to court over chastity ring (while Muslim students can wear bracelets)

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | April 28, 2007 | Jonathan Petre and

[Stoat]

Schoolgirl goes to court over chastity ring

By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent, and Hazel Southam
 

Last Updated: 3:52am BST 28/04/2007

 

 

• A teenage girl banned from wearing a Christian chastity ring at school is taking her case to the High Court.

  Lydia Playfoot wanted to wear a silver ring that showed her commitment to remain a virgin until marriage. But her school refused permission on health and safety grounds and because the ring infringed its jewellery policy.

  The dispute echoes last year's row over whether a British Airways employee could wear a cross and that of Shabina Begum, a Muslim excluded from her school in Luton for wearing a jilbab in defiance of school rules. She took the school to the High Court but lost her case.

  	Lydia Playfoot has messages of support from over 30 bishops and 15 politicians in her fight to wear the chastity ring

  Miss Playfoot, 16, from Horsham, West Sussex, has an impressive array of politicians and Church leaders backing her claims that Millais School, a non-denominational religious secondary school for girls in Horsham, has breached Article 9 of the Human Rights Act, which protects a person's right to practise their religion or beliefs.

  She is revising for 11 GCSEs while she waits to hear when her High Court judicial review case will be held. The £20,000 needed for the hearing has been largely raised from friends and individual donors.

  Although the school allows Muslim and Sikh pupils to wear headscarves, trousers and kara bracelets as a cultural expression of their religion, the chastity ring - a small band engraved with a biblical verse, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-4 - is not allowed because it is considered to be jewellery. The school also forbids the wearing of crosses and crucifixes.

  "I felt as if I was being picked on because I was a Christian," said Miss Playfoot. "People were around me from other faiths and they could wear trousers and bracelets and headscarves. There was no issue. It made me feel a bit upset."

  Miss Playfoot chose to wear the ring after an event held two years ago by an American Christian movement, The Silver Ring Thing, which promotes abstinence before marriage and has encouraged a growing number of adolescents to make "a pledge of chastity".

  The ring refers to the Biblical quote: "God wants you to be holy and completely free from sexual immorality. Each of you men should know how to live with his wife in a holy and honourable way".

  Initially it did not cause a stir at the school. But after a dozen other girls started wearing the rings Miss Playfoot was asked to remove hers on the grounds that it broke the school's no-jewellery policy and it could injure someone if she fell and used her hand to steady herself.

  When she refused she was placed "in isolation", missing classes and studying on her own. "I was surprised because the people who get put in isolation are caught smoking and are really rude and outrageous," she said. "I thought, why am I here? I didn't feel as if I'd done anything wrong."

  Her family claims that the school suggested she could attach the ring to her school bag, but if that was not acceptable she might have to look for a school that would allow her to wear it.

  Although Miss Playfoot has not worn the ring in classes since last April, she decided to take the school to the High Court "because I didn't want them to think that they had won. You can't treat Christians like this".

  Her father, Phil, 49, a minister in the non-denominational evangelical King's Church in Horsham, and her mother Heather, 47, said they felt "very disappointed" over the school ruling.

  So far Miss Playfoot has received messages of support from more than 30 bishops and 15 politicians, including Lord Tebbit, the former Tory party chairman, David Willetts, the shadow secretary of state for education, and the Tory MP Ann Widdecombe.

  The school declined to comment yesterday.

[Pyro7480]

Actually, it looks like kara braclets are part of Sikhism, not Islam.

Kara (Sikhism)

[Stoat]

Ummmm...When I Googled “Kara bracelet” it showed up as related to the Sikh religion"

 It's unfortunate that the article didn't make the distinction that they were specific to Sikhs.....they lumped it all together in the sentence:

"Although the school allows Muslim and Sikh pupils to wear headscarves, trousers and kara bracelets as a cultural expression of their religion"

My bad...I stand corrected.

I am so very accustomed to Muslims being favored over Christians in society that I drew the wrong conclusion from the sentence.

It doesn't change the fact that the school isn't enforcing the jewelry ban consistently, however.

[Stoat]

You’re right, I drew the wrong conclusion from the way the article was written. I stand corrected.

[Aria]

Interesting. But still, why can’t the Christian wear her little ring?

[Stoat]

Interesting. But still, why can’t the Christian wear her little ring?

Because the Left hates Christianity with a seething, visceral passion.

(And Christians won't blow up the school building if they are insulted)

[KrisKrinkle]

“I am so very accustomed to Muslims being favored...”

I understand. I wouldn’t have noticed except that I got curious about the Kara bracelet.

“It doesn’t change the fact...”

True.

“...I stand corrected.”

You may sit down. It’ll be easier to use the keyboard that that way :)

[Sender]

Aren’t Sikh students also allowed to wear their ceremonial daggers in school, while other students would be jailed for a pocketknife?

[Stoat]

You may sit down. It’ll be easier to use the keyboard that that way :)

LMAO

Thanks  :-)  I do feel sheepish over my error, however.

(snicker)

[BuffaloJack]

Another example of the liberal quest to stamp out Christianity.

[KrisKrinkle]

“Aren’t Sikh students also allowed to wear their ceremonial daggers in school, while other students would be jailed for a pocketknife?”

I don’t know. I know the issue of wearing the ceremonial knife has been raised seveal places and I think the Sikhs have prevailed sometimes.

[weegee]

The Sex Positive proponents don’t like her public sign of a commitment to abstinence. They oppose abstinence because they believe it is an unhealthy supression of sexual desires. They want to see everyone sexually active at every age.

This is the culture war.

[Stoat]

I had heard about the ceremonial dagger issue as well, and I understand that they solved the problem by welding the dagger to the scabbard so that it could not be drawn. This removed it from the ‘weapon’ category but I’m wondering if this particular school would still regard it as jewelry?

[Aria]

They must want to see us go down in flames like the Roman Empire. Or...didn’t they think that far ahead....
IDIOTS!

[ApplegateRanch]

Kick this troublemaker out, and put her butt in a Christian school, where such ‘hate speech’ as these rings are tolerated.

That ring is a symbol of rebellion and repression, in that it is telling the world that she has pride in her unsanctioned morality, and they are wrong in their officially promoted Hedonism.

It is a hurtfull reproaching of her peers that she still stubornly retains that which they willingly and foolishly gave away, and can never regain.

It is an irritating reminder to officials that some beliefs are more equal than others, despite the platitudes they spout.

[Stoat]

Another example of the liberal quest to stamp out Christianity.

Agreed.  I'm delighted that this young lady is pursuing her case.....this school deserves a very public black eye over this.

[Stoat]

Well-stated; I couldn’t agree more.

[Pyro7480]

Here's a link about the ceremonial dagger, which is called a kirpan.

Kirpan

Here's what I admire about the tradition:

In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi Amrit Sanchar to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defense which together with the other 4 Kakars formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam of the tenth master. The five Kakars clearly and instantly identify a Khalsa Sikh. The Kirpan is worn on a cloth belt called a Gatra.

This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

[Stoat]

That’s fascinating, thanks for posting. With a tradition like that, Sikhs should be fervent NRA supporters :-)

[ApplegateRanch]

I looked these up, and they are Sikh bracelets, not Muslim.

The Muslims are wearing other religious symbols or garb.

Where these things, wrong as they are, are enable is due to the fact that Christians are not commanded to wear or otherwise display any outward symbol of faith; we ARE the symbol of our faith, by application of our faith.

Indeed, to feel that one must wear such a symbol, or lose their Salvation, is a form of idolatry, that is no different than “going whoiring after strange gods”.

Our salvation is not in things, but in acceptance of Christ’s Atonement on the Cross for us. The school can never remove that from one’s heart.

[Pyro7480]

Where these things, wrong as they are, are enable is due to the fact that Christians are not commanded to wear or otherwise display any outward symbol of faith; we ARE the symbol of our faith, by application of our faith.

Where is that in the Bible? The closest thing I can think of is Jesus' command to not pray like those hypocrites who go out just to be seen; in other words, out of pride.