Or why political correctness is a fallacy. Muslim attire. Check. Sikh attire. Check. A small, Christian-based silver ring?
It is only a band of silver, imprinted with a Bible verse, worn by a schoolgirl.
But the decision by one of the country's top state schools to ban American-style 'purity rings' – increasingly worn by Christian teenagers to symbolise a pledge not to have sex before marriage – has prompted not just a standoff with local parents, but a debate over religious expression and sex education.
Heather and Philip Playfoot have spent almost two years in dispute with Millais School in Horsham, West Sussex, over their 15-year-old daughter Lydia's ring. While the school's uniform rules forbid jewellery, they argue that the rings – given to teenagers who complete a controversial evangelical church course preaching sexual abstinence – hold genuine religious significance.
'The ring is a reminder to them of the promise they have made, much the same as a wedding ring is an outward sign of an inward promise,' said Heather Playfoot.
'There are Muslim girls in the school who are allowed to wear the headcovering, although that isn't part of the school uniform, and Sikh girls who are allowed the wear the bangle although that isn't part of the uniform. It's a discriminatory policy.
'We don't want her education to be disrupted because of it but we do want her to feel free to wear something that is very significant.'
The family claim that Lydia and up to a dozen other pupils wearing purity rings have been forced to take lessons in isolation as punishment for breaking the rules, threatened with detention and that – in Lydia's case – the school governors intimated she could be expelled for repeatedly defying the rules. Heather Playfoot said the school had told them it was a health and safety issue.
Lydia has now stopped wearing the ring in school. 'It makes me feel quite upset and angry as well, and in a way betrayed a little, because the school are always teaching us to be safe and we are trying to stand up for something,' she told The Observer. 'We get picked on and called out of lessons to see if we have got [the rings] on. I do actually keep to the school rules and I don't like stepping out of line or anything, but I just think this is really unfair.'
What PC boils down to is anti-Christian and anti-Western. Pretty much anything else is perfectly fine. Just not those "icky" things.
Can’t really dig these school uniforms.
We tried to avoid them every time we could.
And this ring is not allowed… I wonder if the teachers have to take their rings off.
Yep, ok, I wouldn’t let kids wear real gold and diamond rings, but then a cheap keepsy or something like that.
Strange things go on on every side over there.
Can’t understand people. Don’t they have more pressing issues than picking on a ring?
Yeah – it’s a really stupid thing to go after, and it shows where the bias is, too.
Don’t see too much bias.
“While the school’s uniform rules forbid jewellery”
A ring is jewelry. A scarf is not.
Jewelry is forbidden.
I don’t see where it says that she could not wear a shawl.
It’s just stupid and rigid adherence to the written rules.
The scarf is a religious and political symbol. The ring is Christian based – wrong religion to be tolerant of? That’s bias.
I said “stupid and rigid adherence to the written rules”.
Now, that means, that you look at the word: jewelry.
You look up “ring” in the dictionary – piece of jewelry.
Yup, gone.
Can’t you believe it that it was not even considered as a religious symbol by the board?
Most of the time, I like your opinions, but now you sound like “oooooh, they must hurt me because ….”.
Preconceptions.
You want to believe that muslims and non-european cultures are privilegised on a conspiracy-theory level, that you will see everything in that light.
Roland – did you read the article? They are objecting because it is a faith-based initiative that they disagree with. They are using the ring as jewelry ban as an excuse.
Yes I read it.
The only people who brought up the religious part of the ring was the parents and the organisation.
“However Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society defended the school, adding: ‘If the school has the uniform policy I don’t see why it should make an exception for this. ”
“Leon Nettley, headmaster of the Millais School, said in a statement…. ‘In relation to the issue of wearing a purity ring, the school is not convinced that pupils’ rights have been interfered with by the application of the school’s uniform policy.’”
They never said it is banned because it is a symbol
They said: No jewelry. Period.
Oh, if you are referring to this one: I’m deeply distrustful of these Silver Ring Thing-type initiatives: the research is quite clear that they don’t work.’
this was not said by the school. It was said by Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society.
The school has not raised the religious connection.