Home (Post) Mobile Authors Say Anything Register Login

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Anti-Christian Zealotry in Britain… Liberal Hypocrites on Parade

An item from Fox News ... coming soon to a school board near you:

A teenage girl banned from wearing a chastity ring in class lost a legal challenge against her former school at Britain’s High Court Monday.

Lydia Playfoot, 16, had argued that the ban at the Millais School in Horsham, about 40 miles south of London, was an “unlawful interference” with her right to express her Christian faith…

Playfoot wears a ring as a sign of her commitment to abstinence from sex until marriage. Many Christian teenagers worldwide wear the chastity rings, which were inspired by “The Silver Ring Thing,” an abstinence program launched in the United States in 1996.

As bad as this sort of idiotarian policy might seem, here’s the real shocker in all this politically correct bigotry:

The school had said the ring fell outside its uniform policy… (a policy) which makes exceptions for Muslims wearing head scarves and Sikhs wearing steel bracelets.

Comments

Rob
Rob
19182 comments
Send a private message

If it were a ban on all religious costumes and customs in school it would be fair.  Overzealous and unnecessary, but fair.

But this is worse.  Special protected classes get better treatment.  It’s discrimination, and even though it’s now seen as PC, it’s just as bad as Jim Crow, etc.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 17, 2007 at 12:32 pm

Rob: “Fairness” is not achieved by “banning”; that’s repression.  Real fairness is accomplished by complete inclusion.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 17, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Avatar for HG

I thought liberals pride themselves on fairness?

HG on July 17, 2007 at 01:51 pm

The sheer two faced hypocisy of this is staggering to me.


The future ain’t what it used to be.....

Pilgrim on July 17, 2007 at 01:56 pm

I thought liberals pride themselves on fairness?

HG,

No, Sir.  Liberals pride themselves on “fairness,” “diversity,” “inclusiveness,” and of course “democracy.”

To liberals its the words that matter, not the actually concepts those words describe… all of which are anathema to liberals anyway.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on July 17, 2007 at 02:22 pm

First Brittons ban guns and prosecute those who defend their own homes.  Now they are turning against token expressions.  Even the black panthers here in the USA won their case to wear black armbands from our Surpreme Court in the 1970s, but of course, the race card played a part in that case.  This is yet one more example of NOT freedom of expression, religion, moral stance or anything good and proper.  Shame on them.  England was already off my list of European countries to visit.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on July 17, 2007 at 02:35 pm
Rob
Rob
19182 comments
Send a private message

Rob: “Fairness” is not achieved by “banning”; that’s repression.  Real fairness is accomplished by complete inclusion.

Except that complete inclusion isn’t always possible.  If we decide we want to let Christian students pray in school, we have to allow equal time for Muslim students.  But Muslims pray several times throughout the day.  Plus, there may be other religions out there who have prayer requirements that just aren’t practical for a school setting.

So what we’re left with is trying to find a reasonable compromise that respects a spirit of inclusion while not actively treating one creed differently than another.

Clearly that has happened in this instance with Muslim students being able to wear the symbol of their religion, but not Christian students.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 17, 2007 at 03:11 pm

If it were a ban on all religious costumes and customs in school it would be fair.

Respectfully, a celibacy ring is not a religious custom or garb. It is not a religious requirement that Christian girls wear these rings, different than it is with the muslims and the sikhs. at any rate, when the school begins telling the girl that sh can’t be celibate, then they have a case. chances are its a private school with a dress code. private means private. we aren’t going to endorse thrusting forced acceptance on private organizations now are we? seems like something most here would be against.


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on July 17, 2007 at 06:07 pm

Respectfully, Sparkie, you miss the point.  It is not up to the school, private or public, to determine what does or does not qualify as an expression of one’s religious faith.

As has been pointed out, had the school chosen to ban all such articles of attire, then the Christian chick wouldn’t have much of an argument.  But having opened the door, so to speak, to Muslims and Sikhs, they are hard pressed to defend closing on a Christian.  It is not up to the school to determine the parameters of this girl’s faith… including her commitment to premarital celibacy.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on July 17, 2007 at 06:17 pm

When we were confirmed as Lutheran we received a necklace with a diamond studded cross. There would be no way someone is going to tell me I can not wear that while I attend school. This girl had her rights violated. Where is the
UK ACLU when they could actually be doing something correct for once?


flag002.gif washC.gif Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Anna on July 17, 2007 at 06:21 pm

Bat: Two things: if it’s not a religious custom, as Sparkie stated, then what basis does the school have for banning her ring?
The other one is the 800 pound gorilla in this “room”: everyone knows that Muslims might do something ugly, like behead you on video, but they also know that Christians won’t.  End of story.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 17, 2007 at 06:22 pm

Even with all the BS that lefties like Rosie put out, the leftie cowards know that they can attack Christians without fear of reprisal.  Not so with the Muslims, so, like the cowards they are, the lefties cater to the Muslims and attack the Christians.  No matter how much philosophy BS they spout, they are just afraid, that’s all.  They want to ban guns because they know they deserve to be shot for being traitors to America.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on July 17, 2007 at 06:29 pm

Where is the UK ACLU when they could actually be doing something correct for once?

Anna,

They are probably sitting around waiting for the next 30-ish Middle Eastern male to object that his conviction for attempted suicide bombing should be overturned because the search of his backpack which turned up the bomb was the result of illicit racial profiling.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on July 17, 2007 at 06:32 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses. Confirm your email address here.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.