Christians threaten religious takeover with chastity rings

This just in from England:

A teenage girl took her school to the High Court today, claiming that it had discriminated against her Christian faith by banning her from wearing a “purity ring”.

Lydia Playfoot told the court in London that she had been unlawfully prevented from wearing the silver ring symbolising her belief in chastity before marriage.

And she warned that other girls are facing “an ethical and moral crisis” because of a lack of guidance.

She was challenging the decision by Millais School in Horsham, West Sussex, to bar her and a number of other girls from wearing the rings because jewellery was outlawed under the uniform code.

She argued that the school did allow Muslim and Sikh students to wear headscarfs and religious bracelets as manifestations of their faith.

The 16-year-old said that, although she was “proud” to be a pupil at the non-denominational school, “it does not afford equal rights to Christians”.


But Leon Nettley, the headmaster, denied there had been any discrimination, saying that the purity ring “is not a Christian symbol, and is not required to be worn by any branch within Christianity”.

In his statement, he said that a Muslim girl had been permitted to wear a headscarf “as it was understood this was considered to be a requirement of her faith” and the school believed to do otherwise would unlawfully breach her human rights.

Two Sikh girls had been allowed to wear a Kara bangle on a similar basis.

In the case of the purity ring, however, the school had concluded it was “just one of several methods of publicising a specific view within the Christian faith,” he said.

The judicial review, which was backed by the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship, is seen by many Christians as an important test of their religious rights in an increasingly secular society.

Messages of support have comes from bishops, Muslim groups and politicians, including David Willetts, the shadow Education Secretary.

However, the National Secular Society warned that the action was symptomatic of increasing pressure by religious groups on schools.

Read the rest here.

Those darn Christians. First they ask to wear rings with Bible verses supporting chastity; next thing you know, they’re beheading people. Gotta nip ’em in the bud.

(Should I add here, for people who aren’t familiar with my blog, that I have no problem with Christians or chastity rings, but have a big problem with societies that pander to all religions but for Judaism and Christianity?)

UPDATE: I’ve had a night to think about what bugged me so much about this story, and it’s that old moral equivalence thing again. Britain, once a society sure enough of itself to broadcast throughout the world the moral values it believed were right, now is afraid to allow a girl to display a blatant symbol for chastity.

The fact is, in any culture, chastity is a virtue — and it should especially be so in England, which is having an explosion of teen abortions. A blanket proscription against jewelry, whether everyone can be an obvious statist clone or to minimize the risk of gang jewelry, reflects an administrative refusal to think about what virtues a society must encourage for its own collective sanity.

UPDATE II: The story’s now got legs. Not only did the Times (which has fewer and fewer readers) pick it up, but Michelle Malkin (who has more and more readers) did too.


11 Responses

  1. B, the government-run schools’ underlying campaign is what matters. They’re absolutely determined to destroy all competing sources of guidance and authority; note in particular their arrogation of the parental privilege of teaching our spratlings about sex, in all its manifestations. Any indication that a youth prefers some alternative source of wisdom simply must be stamped out before it can infect others!

    I’m unsurprised that “educators” are as aggressive about it in Britain as they are here, and equally unsurprised that they prefer Christians over Muslims as their targets. Muslims have this nasty habit of rioting over such treatment.

  2. What would Hitchens,Dawkins,and Harris say ?

  3. Wheeeeew!

    Book, I am glad you don’t advocate beheading us Christians.

    (I knew that.. and appreciate your tolerance and support of those like me who are believers in Christ).

    But your observations are correct… The worldwide liberal tidal wave is using every means to silence conservative Jews and Christians.



  4. Those darn Christians. First they ask to wear rings with Bible verses supporting chastity; next thing you know, they’re (cravenly) apply their end-times theology to Israeli politics.

  5. Greag: You mean they apply their moral clarity to Israeli politics. I don’t want to argue this with you, though. Your ability to conflate the appalling thuggish Palestinians who, in the interval between slaughtering Jews and Christians, turn on each other with unparalleled savagery; with the Jews, who have always been willing to trade land for peace and who are extraordinarily successful in limiting their targets to military figures is, quite simply, sickening.

  6. they’re (cravenly) apply their end-times theology to Israeli politics.

    He means They are cravenly applying their end-times theology to Israeli politics.

    Your ability to conflate the appalling thuggish Palestinians who,

    That’s cause G is transfering or displacing as they call it. He wants to be a thug, but because he can’t in the West, he’ll promote thugs and thuggish behavior.

  7. Book,

    greag as he calls himself is apparently a troll who has made a habit of visiting my site and signing in under two different names — greag and Pastor Ray — both from the same identical IP address. IP: Check it out on your system.

    Interesting that he sends a different email address here and there.

    Amazing these ones who advocate thuggish behavior — afraid to sign in with a legitimate email address..

    In Christ,


  8. Hey! So I was right when I suggested that G, greag, and PissRay may all be the same happy family trio?

    What a menage a trois

    a domestic arrangement in which three people having sexual relations occupy the same household.

    Got to get some medicine for that dissociative psychological disorder you got there, thug in training.

  9. Sounds like Y is the bully.

  10. Everything sounds like bullscheisse from you. This is your fault, S, not mine.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: