How do you publically express your faith?
The news report of Lydia Playfoot, a London 16 year old, has intrigued me. As part of a youth movement, The Silver Ring Thing, Lydia wears a a ring on the third finger of the left hand. It is inscribed with “Thess. 4:3-4,” a reference to a Biblical passage from Thessalonians which reads: “God wants you to be holy, so you should keep clear of all sexual sin.” The problem is that her school has a rule against religious jewelry which is not a key component of a particular religion. Lydia Playfoot commented on the ruling,
“I am very disappointed by the decision this morning by the High Court not to allow me to wear my purity ring to school as an expression of my Christian faith not to have sex outside marriage. I believe that the judge’s decision will mean that slowly, over time, people such as school governors, employers, political organizations and others will be allowed to stop Christians from publicly expressing and practicing their faith.”
Not surprisingly, Lydia’s case is just the latest in a series of cases regarding the country-wide ban on religious symbols in schools. Her purity ring is viewed in the same manner as a veil, headscarf, crucifix or a Muslim gown. Also not surprising is that her parents are key members in the Silver Ring Thing movement.
Lydias’s lawyers argued that the ban by her school in Horsham, West Sussex, breached her human rights to “freedom of thought, conscience and religion” which are protected by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Lawyers for the school denied discrimination and said the purity ring breached its rules on wearing jewelry. They said allowances were made for Muslim and Sikh pupils only for items integral to their religious beliefs and that, for the same reason, crucifixes were also allowed. But it argued that the purity ring was not an integral part of the Christian faith.
A purity ring is a nice idea, to some, though I personally disagree that a ring will keep any teenager from premarital sex. God’s Word impressed on her by the Holy Spirit learned at the foot of her parents will keep her from premarital sex. I ring won’t do that. God promises to work through His word, not through a ring. I do think that her parents probably have taught her God’s Word. They are also teaching her about when to respect a law or rule and when to fight it.
Regarding her claim that the court ruling will affect Christians’ ability to publicly express their faith, I don’t agree with her. Currently we, both Americans and Britons, still have freedom of speech and reasonable actions. To me that is how we publicly express our faith, through conversations with others and church attendance (though I must admit that those things may be threatened one day in the Western world, as they are in some countries now.) To ask students not to wear religious symbols at school is a different thing. Of course, its too bad that her school has such a ban on religious jewelry, but it is understandable in today’s world. There are no bans like that, to my knowledge, in my state. Perhaps in the country. It would have been nice if the article’s writer had researched and mentioned that, considering that I read it on a US website, MSNBC.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19806312/
Well, everything you say is reasonable, but it still annoys me all the same. What harm would it do to allow the ring?
And whose to say what is required? Technically a cross or crucifix is not required. I don’t wear one, maybe you do. And some Muslims say the full chador/burqa/whatever is required?
Perhaps the best thing to come out of this is that Lydia Playfoot (what a name, that!) will realize that chastity is not only good, it’s counter-cultural as well.
In general, I don’t think schools by nature can have “free speech” (this is the teacher in me speaking!) but with it school officials should try not to be irrational.
I also don’t see what the harm is in allowing students to wear religious jewelry. Who’s to say what is required in a religion? I wonder if her school had a “committee” to determine it? It doesn’t seem to be a school’s right to determine what is required, does it?
I think the legal education aspects of this case are as interesting as the religious aspects. As a parent, what do I teach my kids regarding obeying laws and rules even when I don’t agree with them? I can disagree with a school rule, but my kids must still obey it. Of course, they should break laws and rules that go against faith in God. I don’t think the rule at Lydia’s school breaks any of God’s laws nor affects her ability to practice her faith. Unless she has a faith in jewelry.
I still don’t get the whole purity ring concept. To me it is born of outward actions designed to witness to others (which I find offensive), rather than proclaiming God’s Word as you live your life out day to day. I also think such programs wrongly focus on one aspect of a person’s life, while ignoring the fact that we all remain sinners and sin each day. Perfection won’t be reach on earth and I think purity programs give kids the message that they can achieve purity in all areas of their lives. Of course, avoiding premarital sex is very possible and very desirable. I do understand that the people who participate in such programs intend it for good.
“I also think such programs wrongly focus on one aspect of a person’s life, while ignoring the fact that we all remain sinners and sin each day. Perfection won’t be reach on earth and I think purity programs give kids the message that they can achieve purity in all areas of their lives.”
I hadn’t thought so much about that. Good point!