I think I’ve said before that I’m not really one for posting a ton about the news to Shaycam, but I am finding that the more and more I read, the more I want to write about it.
In a recent article about a girl who lost a legal battle over a chasity ring I was actually surprised by the maturity of a statement the girl made. The girl claims to be a Christian and she has been trying to wear a “purity ring” to signify her abstaining from sex before marriage. Besides the fact that court in the UK (where the school is) ruled against her, I thought her statement was interesting. In her response about how she felt about the ruling she said
I believe the ruling 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.
Though we have no way of knowing if this will be true until that time comes, I honestly agree with her. Yeah, this might have happened in the UK where things are a little different then they are here in the U.S., but the point is it’s bound to happen here too. Coming from a teenager I actually thought her foresight was well founded. I’m not going to say whether she is being persecuted or not, but I am going to say that I think this is small but interesting issue and we’ll have to see what the future holds.
4 replies on “One Ring Lead to Another…”
Thought provoking post on several levels. First, from the article it sounded like the school has a “no jewelry” policy. If that is the case, why should the school make an exception for this particular ring? Also, her statement is alarmist in nature and seems intended to grab headlines. No one is stopping her from publicly expressing or practicing her faith. I don’t remember Jesus telling his followers to “Go into all the world and wear Christian merchandise”. Our faith is expressed more than anything else in how we live, not in our fashion choices. I think that making a big deal out of this and taking it to the courts can do more harm than good to the name of Jesus.
That’s enough for now…sorry for the long comment.
Thanks for your insight.
I would definitely agree that I don’t think Jesus was all jazzed about us wearing all this ridiculous merchandise. I don’t think that’s really the issue. I think more than anything what we are seeing is another notch taken away from the freedom’s we enjoy on this Earth. The UK is usually more liberal on many levels and to have the High Court make a decision like that is kind of interesting. I just think we are going to start seeing these kinds of decisions being made in America soon and they we’ll be talking about this more. We may have the “freedom of religion” now, but when that gets reinterpreted somewhere down the road, it’ll all be over.
Oh, and one more thing… You mentioned that “no on is stopping her from publicly expressing or practicing her faith.” I agree, except that part of what she thought was expressing her faith was to wear a purity ring. I think that’s why it went to court in the first place. Because she believes she is losing that freedom. Finally, her faith is more public now than it probably ever would have been…
I see your point and agree that religious freedom may be compromised in the future. However, I don’t see this as a freedom of religion issue. In fact, while the school has an overall ban on jewelry, it allows adornments required by religious beliefs. Obviously this girl can restrain from having sex without wearing the ring (cheapshot, I know — sorry). In fact one of the beauties of our faith is that we don’t have those types of shallow mandates. And as far as her faith being publicly known, is it her faith in Jesus Christ as her Savior from sin and Mediator to a relationship with God that is known, or the fact that she has taken a moral stand many teens take regardless of faith? Not to bust your chops, but it is an interesting question.
Now, while I mentioned I don’t think that this is a freedom of religion issue, it is definitely a “freedom” issue. Why is the school allowed to ban jewelry as a form of expression? I would argue that in the UK, overall freedom is on the decline. Their citizens are photographed and videoed hundreds of times a day by the government. Orwellian, yes?
Okay, time for me to throw in my two cents worth. I think it interesting that she says “others will be allowed to stop Christians from publically expressing and practicing their faith”. She speaks as if this is future tense. Teachers will get fired today for speaking about God in the classroom. They cannot have anything on their desk that mentions Jesus or Christianity. Employess at Dell, Micron, Xerox and others have been sued and fired claiming religious harasment because they speak openly about their faith. There have been over 11 attempts to get “in God we trust” taken off money. There is currently legislation pending trying to stop churches as being labled religious and non-profit, mind you it leaves out synagogues and mosques. All this to say, it is not going to happen, it currently is happening. I think the true Christian church needs to be prepared for what the government will be imposing upon them and their attendants over the next 10 years. Seperation of church and state is a laughable comment. They government is very invovled and I think what has happened the last few years is only the beginning.
Okay, off my soap box now.