There’s a story over at the BBC, which I was alerted to by BBC News 24, about some 16 year old christian lass, Lydia Playfoot, who is taking her (now prior) school to the High Court because they didn’t want her wearing jewellery, which is against established school policy.

The jewellery in question is a silver ring, which she says is a sign of her christian commitment to not have sex until she’s married, and claims that the school is violating her human rights.

The school, which allows traditional and justified religious attire and accessories, says that the ring is not an essential part of her religion, unlike, say, the hijab is for muslim women.

As far as I can see, this is another example of the terminally religious attempting to again inveigle the ridiculous idea of “it’s my religion: you must respect it!” onto the statute (which is already replete with concessions to dogma). In this morning’s interview on the BBC, the girl (claiming that she was doing it for “others”) had absolutely no substance to her argument, and it was patently obvious that this was something that her father was directing. He even went so far as to make the IMR:YMRI claim and saying that they were deserved of special treatment because of it.

Erm, no. Still no. As many times as is necessary: no.

As people I may respect them (although unlikely since they’re trying this sort of shit on in the courts), but I have no desire nor compulsion to show deference to their superstitions, and I won’t, no matter how nice they are.

I hope they get told where to go. And pay costs.

This entry was posted Friday, June 22nd, 2007 at 11:06 am and is filed under . You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.