UK High Court Rules Against Girl Defending Right to Wear Chastity Ring

LifeSiteNews.com ^ | July 16, 2007 | Peter J. Smith

[monomaniac]

LONDON, July 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A teenage girl lost her legal battle for the right to wear a chastity ring in class after the United Kingdom's High Court ruled the school's ban did not constitute "unlawful interference" with her Christian faith.

Lydia Playfoot, 16, had challenged the ban imposed by Millais School in Horsham, saying the ring was an expression of her Christian faith and commitment to abstain from sex until marriage.

Playfoot was among a dozen other girls that had worn the chastity rings until the school ordered them to remove them saying that it violated the uniform policy.

Deputy High Court Judge Michael Supperstone ruled in favor of Millais School saying it did not breach the Human Rights Act.

"The claimant was under no obligation, by reason of her belief, to wear the ring," Supperstone reasoned.

The High Court judge rejected the arguments of Playfoot's attorneys that wearing the ring was an expression of faith in the same category as head scarves for Muslims or steel bracelets for Sikhs.

In a statement today, Playfoot said that she was "very disappointed" by the High Court decision. She stated her belief that the ruling "will mean that slowly, over time, people such as school governors, employers, political organisations and others will be allowed to stop Christians from publicly expressing and practising their faith".

Lydia Playfoot's father, Rev. Philip Playfoot agreed, saying, "This country is tolerant of any views except those of Christians." He added that his daughter's case was a "microcosm" of what is happening to Christians in the UK.

The Playfoots will have to pay £12,000 towards the secondary school's court costs, along with their own, unless they can successfully petition the appeal court to hear the case.

Read previous LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Students Barred From Wearing Christian Chastity Symbol in UK School http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06062003.html

Teenage U.K. Girl Sues School in High Court for Banning Her Chastity Ringhttp://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jun/07062703.html

Religious Schools in UK Forced to Teach About All Religions http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/feb/06022208.html

UK, Canada Ran Neck and Neck in 2006 Race to Exterminate Religious Freedom http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07011704.html

[Proud_USA_Republican]

The muslims are laughing as we slit our own throats.

[Wpin]

Just another example of Europes fall from grace with basic moral principals. We are undoubtedly headed for some horribly interesting times

[AlexW]

“Just another example of Europes fall from grace with basic moral principals.”

Other then Britain, it is no worse here then in the US.
Here in Slovakia, the church is very much alive and well, and there is no PC crap here.

I have no desire to return to the US as long as the socialist and PC crowd are on the march.

[sourcery]

The ruling is correct. The policy against jewelry is not aimed at religion in any way. And the wearing the of the ring in question is not required by the tenets of the girl’s faith. Given those two facts, the school has the right to forbid the wearing of all jewelry, as long as they have the rightful power to enforce a dress code as a condition for admittance to the school.

The ruling also establishes the precedent that would be necessary to lawfully forbid the wearing of veils and hijabs (for example.)

[EdArt]

I lived in Czech for 2 years and spent time in Slovakia, I enjoyed it.

[expatguy]

Here is a Muslim girl in Malaysia - and as you can see the hijab or tudung as it is refered to here is integral to her faith.

Perhaps the British judge would like to explain to this Muslim girl that she is improperly dressed and how the hijab is an integral part of her faith

What America and Britain are experiencing firsthand is ethnic chauvinism, a reactive response and a rejection to assimilation and integration.

In almost all cases it is a militant devotion to extremism carried out by moderates. (Not all Muslim are going to blow themselves up) You will notice that many of these displays of ethnic chauvinism became popular after 911 - it is the moderate's way of showing support for the extremist agenda.

It is a statement. Nothing more and nothing less.

The reality is that if they are truly concerned with following the precepts of Wahabbism (which is what you are appeasing) then the women would not even be allowed to be out in public unescorted without a male relative.

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

[restornu]

[TheThinker]

What a freedom-loving people the Brits have become! And I'll let you in on a secret. I'm not even religious and this offends me.

[Jack Hammer]

Common sense would appear to be dead in the UK.

[Iwo Jima]

The Playfoots will have to pay £12,000 towards the secondary school's court costs, along with their own...

For those who think that "loser pays" is such a great idea, pay attention to this part. Unlike the "loser pays" English tradition, the American tradition has been that each party bear its own legal costs in most cases. Our practice is better. Under the English "loser pays" system, the courts are effectively closed to most people.

This is a valid lawsuit which needed to have been brought and should have prevailed. There is no way that they should add insult to injury by having this girl's family have to pay the school's attorneys' fees.

[x_plus_one]

Were the judges muslims, anglicans, atheists?

[goldstategop]

Of course if Muslims want to wear a burkha, that would pass muster with the High Court. Its just those damned Christians who should shut up and disappear. Melanie Phillips' Londonistan is becoming truer by the day.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Rikstir]

agreed. well said

[Rikstir]

you got your system, we have ours. you dont like it, dont go to court in this country. simple.

[Aquinasfan]

I can’t express myself without using profanities.

[Rikstir]

basic moral principles dont have to come through religious dogma. in an ideal world, each of us will be intelligent enough to make informed choices, and not have to rely on the bias of all religion. we live in a secular state, so I’m all for a banning of all types of religious gear, be it Christian, muslim, jewish, or any other denomination. it aint going to happen, but small victories like this one help a secular state, stay secular.