18 October 2006
School bans Christian chastity ring but allows Muslim and Sikh symbols
A secondary school has come under fire for banning Christian pupils from wearing rings symbolising a belief in chastity until
marriage.
Millais School in West Sussex has banned the silver 'purity rings', arguing that they fall foul of the school's no-jewellery policy, which only allows pupils to wear simple single stud earrings.
But the school has been accused of double standards as it allows Muslim pupils to wear headscarves and Sikh pupils kara bracelets as a means of religious expression.
The ban is the latest in a series of episodes where organisations ban Christian jewellery. Earlier this week British Airways banned an employee from wearing a cross necklace. The Rev John Brown of Middleton-on-Sea argues that the ban should be lifted as it is 'discriminatory' against Christians.
Rev Brown, 78, a retired Church of England vicar said: 'The ban is totally discriminatory, compared with the way Muslim girls in that school are treated, they are allowed to wear head scarves, symbolising their faith.
'The girls are wearing rings to show their religious belief in abstaining from sex until marraige, it means a great deal to them, so I think it's quite wrong it should be banned.'
Heather and Philip Playfoot have been in dispute with the school in Horsham over the issue for two years.
Their 15-year-old daughter Lydia began wearing her ring - which is inscribed with a biblical verse - in June 2004.
The Playfoots claim Lydia and up to a dozen pupils have been punished for breaking the rules.
Lydia, who no longer wears the ring to school said she feels 'betrayed' by the school.
'My ring is a symbol of my religious faith. I think, as a Christian, it says we should keep ourselves pure from sexual sinfulness and wearing the ring is a good way of making a stand.''
Her parents Heather, 47, a housewife and Phil, 49, a minister in a nondenominational church, are considering taking legal action.
Mr Playfoot said yesterday: 'We hope the school will recognise the ring as a legitimate expression of the childrens' Christian beliefs.'
Mrs Playfoot added: '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.
'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.'
Lydia's ring comes from Silver Ring Thing, an evangelical American Christian movement. It has encouraged a growing number of teenagers to make a 'pledge of chastity'. The silver ring demonstrates commitment to this pledge.
The movement was founded by father- of-three Denny Pattyn in Yuma, Arizona, in 1995. He launched it after discovering Yuma had the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Arizona.
Silver Ring Thing launched in Britain in 2004, promoting abstinence before marriage. More than 20,000 members have signed up at roadshows in the U.S. and Britain.
Leon Nettley, headmaster of Millais, said in a statement that the school's own sex education programme already stressed that underage sex is illegal, and encouraged pupils to discuss the issues.
He added: 'The school is not convinced that pupils' rights have been interfered with by the application of the school's uniform policy.
'The school has a clearly published uniform policy and sets high standards in this respect.'
08:26 Posted in ENGLAND | Permalink | Comments (5) | 
Facebook |
Comments
terrible!
Posted by: rob | 18 October 2006
I'm an atheist, and an enemy of theocracy and have serious issues about Christians who have theocratic tendencies and use or try to use the state to advance their ideology and agenda.. but that also makes me an "Islamophobe'" (that and the Qur'an, Sunnah, Sira and Shari'a).
I find this and similar actions and attitudes abhorrable and discriminatory, but that is because western man has no cajones, no backbone, no spine.
I certainly can condone forbidding religious displays in publicly funded schools, organizations etc.. but in that case ALL religious displays, accoutrements, jewelry, clothing should be forbidden be it hijab, turban sikh or bracelet, yarmulka or kufi....and in some religions, such as a Sikh, a knife is part of the religious garb.
In my religion the religion of Self Preservation and Individuality, the rifle and handgun are religious symbols and any who doesn't carry one is an apostate and traitor to his faith.
Posted by: My Business | 19 October 2006
Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.
The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.
“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.
The document is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.
Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.
But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country’s Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”. At most, they say, they may contain “historical traces”.
The document shows how far the Catholic Church has come since the 17th century, when Galileo was condemned as a heretic for flouting a near-universal belief in the divine inspiration of the Bible by advocating the Copernican view of the solar system. Only a century ago, Pope Pius X condemned Modernist Catholic scholars who adapted historical-critical methods of analysing ancient literature to the Bible.
In the document, the bishops acknowledge their debt to biblical scholars. They say the Bible must be approached in the knowledge that it is “God’s word expressed in human language” and that proper acknowledgement should be given both to the word of God and its human dimensions.
They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways “appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries”.
The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: “We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters.”
They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its “intransigent intolerance” and to warn of “significant dangers” involved in a fundamentalist approach.
“Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others.”
Of the notorious anti-Jewish curse in Matthew 27:25, “His blood be on us and on our children”, a passage used to justify centuries of anti-Semitism, the bishops say these and other words must never be used again as a pretext to treat Jewish people with contempt. Describing this passage as an example of dramatic exaggeration, the bishops say they have had “tragic consequences” in encouraging hatred and persecution. “The attitudes and language of first-century quarrels between Jews and Jewish Christians should never again be emulated in relations between Jews and Christians.”
As examples of passages not to be taken literally, the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.
Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.
The bishops say: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come.”
In their foreword to the teaching document, the two most senior Catholics of the land, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, and Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Archbishop of St Andrew’s and Edinburgh, explain its context.
They say people today are searching for what is worthwhile, what has real value, what can be trusted and what is really true.
The new teaching has been issued as part of the 40th anniversary celebrations of Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council document explaining the place of Scripture in revelation. In the past 40 years, Catholics have learnt more than ever before to cherish the Bible. “We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new.”
A Christian charity is sending a film about the Christmas story to every primary school in Britain after hearing of a young boy who asked his teacher why Mary and Joseph had named their baby after a swear word. The Breakout Trust raised £200,000 to make the 30-minute animated film, It’s a Boy. Steve Legg, head of the charity, said: “There are over 12 million children in the UK and only 756,000 of them go to church regularly.
That leaves a staggering number who are probably not receiving basic Christian teaching.”
BELIEVE IT OR NOT
UNTRUE
Genesis ii, 21-22
So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man
Genesis iii, 16
God said to the woman [after she was beguiled by the serpent]: “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”
Matthew xxvii, 25
The words of the crowd: “His blood be on us and on our children.”
Revelation xix,20
And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had worked the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshipped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone.”
TRUE
Exodus iii, 14
God reveals himself to Moses as: “I am who I am.”
Leviticus xxvi,12
“I will be your God, and you shall be my people.”
Exodus xx,1-17
The Ten Commandments
Matthew v,7
The Sermon on the Mount
Mark viii,29
Peter declares Jesus to be the Christ
Luke i
The Virgin Birth
John xx,28
Proof of bodily resurrection
Posted by: More info | 20 October 2006
funny, the Quran has similar stories as the Bible, so 'More info' is saying that the Quran is also not true!
Posted by: care | 23 October 2006
ABSURDITIES: in the Book of God (?) the Holy Bible (a) A TALKING ass. NUMBERS 22:27-28 (b) FOUR footed fowls. LEVITICUS 11:20 (c) Birth of females a DOUBLE pollution LEVITICUS 12:1,2,5 (d) Shamgar KILLS 600 with an ox goad JUDGES 3:31 (e) Samson KILLS A THOUSAND with the jaw bone of a donkey. JUDGES 15:15-16 (f) A SEVEN HEADED leopard REVELATION 13:1-2 (g) To eat SHIT and drink PISS. 2 KINGS 18:27 and ISAIAH 36:12 (h) DUNG on your faces. MALACHI 2:3 (i) To eat cake with SHIT. EZEKIEL 4:12-15 (j) Samson has SEX with a whore in Gaza JUDGES 16:1 (k) Ruth COHABITS with Boaz in the barn. RUTH 3:4-l5 (1) David SLEEPS with a young virgin l KINGS 1 1:1,3
CONTRADICTIONS: In the Bible— (a) The "Lord" tempted David . . . 2 SAMUEL 24:1 or "Satan provoked David . . . I CHRONICLES 21:1 (b) 700 or 7000? "Horsemen" or "Footmen" . . . ? 2 Samuel 10:18 vs 1 CHRONICLES 19: 18 (c) Solomon had 2000 baths or 3000 baths? 1 KINGS 7-26 vs 2 CHRONICLES 4:5 (d) Solomon had 4000 stalls of horses or 40000? 2 CHRONICLES 9:25 vs 1 KINGS 4:26 (e) Did Saul enquire of the Lord or didn't he? 1 SAMUELS 28:6 vs 1 CHRONICLES 10:13-14 (f) Heaven, no man hath ascended JOHN 3:13 Contradicted by. 2 KINGS 2:11 Elijah ascended, and GENESIS 5:24 Enoch ascended. (g) Jesus lost "None" of his disciples JOHN 18:9 Contradicted by. He lost only "One" JOHN 17:12 (h) ALL are sinners 2 CHRONICLES 6:36 Contradicted by: "Whosoever is born of God DOTH NOT commit sin. . ." 1 John 3:9
Posted by: Stories from the Bible that are not in the Quran | 27 October 2006
The comments are closed.