The Ring Thing - Christianity Under Attack

[Theland]

A girl goes to cour today to fight for the right to wear a Christian ring in school, the school object saying it is not necessary as a token of her beliefs. She says is it as it is called the "Ring Thing" and is an outward statement of her commitment to chastity.
Muslims are allowed the hijab, and sikhs wear bangles, so why can't this girl wear her ring?
What do you think?

[radiogaga]

should this girl not be focusing on her studies?
or maybe if she flunks her exams, theirs always dad's franchise to join.

[THECORBYLOON]

Checking their UK site, Andy Robinson heads the UK branch but the girl�s parents are involved. Phil Playfoot is the �Parents Programme Director� and Heather Playfoot is �Company Secretary.�

[WaldoMcFroog]

Really? Nice. :-\

What kind of parents would get their child to sue a school so they can make a few bucks?

I wonder how God feels about them using him to promote their business in this way?

[gina32]

pippa tiotally agree, my first thoughts were how much is this going to cost us! if it isnt allowed then thats it, one rule for all.

[johnlambert]

As far as I am aware (as a practicing, church going Christian), the Holy Cross is the outward sign that one is a Christian, I had no idea that wearing a silver ring anouncing chastitiy is a sign of Christianity

[andy-hughes]

This case smacks of attention-seeking in a way that makes me highly suspicious of the motives involved.

Why does this girl need to boast non-verbally about her chastity - and that is what this 'ring thing' is - the need to belong to some sort of club with apparent pretentions about the superior attitude they have towards sex before marriage.

This is clearly not a religious issue, and this girl's parents should not be condoning her actions in the 'compensation culture' that seem to confirm to her that if you don;t like a rule, you can waste a lot of time and money making a fuss over it.

The wearing of other garments and jewellry varies from faith to faith, but this is not about faith, it's about an immature girl being goaded and encouraged by immature parents.

The judge should throw this case out on arrival.

[saxy_jag]

SRT434 is not a faith - it's a programme of teaching available to all Christian groups, no matter what their church. Furthermore, it's administered as a registered, limited company - not-for-profit, BUT ... profits are put back into administering the programme. Therefore the Playfoots can hardly hold up the ring as a symbol of faith.

Christians have long held pre-marital chastity as one of the ways in which they uphold their faith. They keep themselves chaste whether or not they declare it to the world, and they don't need jewellery, t-shirts and other money-making merchandise in order to remain that way.

A Jew will not eat pork, a Hindu will not eat beef. Some kids believe in the importance of study over all else, and there are those who have no time for recreational drugs. None of them seem to have an overwhelming need to wear cheap metal rings in order to say so.

It's not often I come down on the side of schools in matters of uniform etc., but I really hope the Playfoots lose this case.