Mary Ann Sorrentino, columnist and former Planned Parenthood director, writes this week on recent legal developments pertaining to the prohibition of chastity rings and the hijab in school.  She raises a key point:

Lydia Playfoot, a 16-year-old English student, regrets that London’s High Court rejected her request to wear a Christian “virginity ring” to school. Playfoot sees the ring as a religious symbol, representing her commitment to virginity before marriage. The High Court said the ring is not a religious symbol, but jewelry, which the school forbids for all students. . . .

Celibacy isn’t easy, especially for teens with raging hormones in their bodies and peer pressure pushing from the outside. I’m not sure all the rings and balls in the world can compete with young love and lust. I am happy to cheer for those who try to resist and also to be there to catch them if they fall.
 
But this virginity sideshow pales alongside bans on serious religious garb mandated by whatever holy texts wearers hold dear. It is worrisome that some courts are missing the same fine distinction that the British High Court, in its wisdom, made in the Playfoot case.