To: LurkedLongEnough
The school says “no jewelry”.
She wears jewelry and gets upset when she gets in trouble for... breaking the rule.
It shouldn’t matter if the ring stood for virginity, dancing with snakes, incest or abortion. The rule says “no jewelry”.
The arguments in the girl’s favor are simply stupid.
8 posted on
07/17/2007 2:45:07 PM PDT by
TheZMan
(Texas is no place for pansy-ass liberals. Ya'll move back to California er Mexico er somethin')
To: TheZMan
But Sikh are allowed to wear bracelets in the same school. That was the problem.
“Miss Playfoot’s lawyers argued in court last month that the school had allowed Muslim and Sikh pupils to wear headscarfs and religious bracelets, and her ring should also be regarded as a genuine religious symbol.”
11 posted on
07/17/2007 2:53:10 PM PDT by
netmilsmom
(To attack one section of Christianity in this day and age, is to waste time.)
To: TheZMan
The Hindu girls at the school are allowed to wear bracelets.
13 posted on
07/17/2007 2:56:01 PM PDT by
expatguy
(Support - "An American Expat in Southeast Asia")
To: TheZMan
It shouldn’t matter if the ring stood for virginity, dancing with snakes, incest or abortion. The rule says “no jewelry”. I wonder if teachers, or married students, are allowed to wear wedding bands? If you were speeding to escape a tsunami or a wildfire, do you think the cops should give you a ticket? The sign says, "Speed Limit 55" after all...
The arguments in the girl’s favor are simply stupid.
Not as stupid as zero tolerance elitist PC rules that require suspension or expulsion for a high school student who pops a Tylenol, chews on a cough drop, brings a 1" plastic GI Joe gun to school, or wears a religious ornament as innocuous as that ring.
16 posted on
07/17/2007 2:58:25 PM PDT by
highimpact
(Abortion - [n]: human sacrifice at the altar of convenience.)
To: TheZMan
The rule has exceptions. The school authorities are, of course, fascist pigs ~ probably keep jackboots in the closet.
And, beyond that, this is occuring in an underdeveloped Islamic nation.
18 posted on
07/17/2007 2:59:41 PM PDT by
muawiyah
To: TheZMan
The “rule” against jewelry doesn’t apply to Muslims or Sikhs. Only Christians.
19 posted on
07/17/2007 2:59:47 PM PDT by
BykrBayb
(This tagline in memory of FReeper 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub ~ Þ)
To: TheZMan
Yeah, I can’t see how this is either big news or that enforcing their school rules is wrong.
It’s like when they banned Spuds McKenzie stuff when I was a kid, even keychains. I thought that was dumb, but they wanted no alcohol ads. Maybe I shoulda sued and said he’s my god or something.
20 posted on
07/17/2007 3:00:18 PM PDT by
Tolsti
To: TheZMan
The school says “no jewelry”. She wears jewelry and gets upset when she gets in trouble for... breaking the rule. It shouldn’t matter if the ring stood for virginity, dancing with snakes, incest or abortion. The rule says “no jewelry”. The arguments in the girl’s favor are simply stupid. If she were married should she be forced to remove her wedding band?
38 posted on
07/17/2007 3:27:20 PM PDT by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
To: TheZMan
It shouldn’t matter if the ring stood for virginity, dancing with snakes, incest or abortion. The rule says “no jewelry”. So I guess ths one's out too.? 
62 posted on
07/17/2007 5:03:30 PM PDT by
Oztrich Boy
("We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area...")
To: TheZMan
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson