Friday, June 22, 2007

Religious Expression

Imagine a school not allowing a student to wear a ring that expresses a religious belief. More specifically a Christian religious belief. Even more specifically the Christian religious belief that one will be chaste and sexually pure prior to marriage. And then imagine that the principal for the school argues as a defense that ,"It is not a Christian symbol, and is not required to be worn by any branch within Christianity."

Well, got actually happened. Let me get this correct. There has to be a "mandate" by some ecclesiastical power in order for a person to do something that expresses their religion? It's a good thing it wasn't a tattoo. With this logic our schools better CRACK DOWN!! There's so much "religious" attire out there...the religion of "self worship" and "culture worship". Check out this article, "British Girl Sues for Right to Wear Chastity Ring".

This just isn't very good logic from a principal, Leon Nettley, at a school in Horsham, south of London. Any thoughts??

No comments: