Religious discrimination (and a school suspension) over a nose piercing.

[C_Felix]

The Church of Body Modification
http://uscobm.com is a federally recogozied church.

From the above link, at the FAQ section:

Is the Church real?
Usually, when people talk about a church being real or “Federally recognized,” they are talking about two things – incorporation as a non-profit entity doing business within a particular state, and a tax-exempt status from the IRS as a non-profit entity. In both of these ways, yes, the Church is real.

Now the fun stuff...

A member of the Church was told to remove her nose stud by school officials. (And its in the town where I live!)

http://www.parentdish.com/2010/09/1...n-school/?icid=main|main|dl4|sec1_lnk3|170588

From the above link:

North Carolina's Clayton High School insists Ariana's tiny stud is a violation of the school's dress code. The pierced freshman claims her nose stud is an expression of her religion, the Church of Body Modification...

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/11/675002/spiritual-piercings-perturb-school.html

From the above link:

The policy says school leaders will make "reasonable accommodation" for students who request a waiver because of "a sincerely held religious belief, cultural heritage, or medical reason."

The Iaconos want the school system to recognize the Church of Body Modification as a religion worthy of such an exemption. Nikki Iacono, 32, said she spoke with Clayton High Principal Clint Eaves, who denied the family's request.

"He pretty much said to me that according to his interpretation of our beliefs ... that it wasn't necessary for her to have a nose piercing," Iacono said. "I think it's unfair that the school district is able to interpret our beliefs and our sincerity."

It sounds like they applied for a waver. "Sounds like" being the key phrase.
The principal gets to interpret their beliefs? WHAT?!

This is basically a first amendment battle.

I can't see this ending well for the school.

 

[Puppycow]

I belong to the Church of Spitwads and Passing Notes.

 

[welshdean]

She should just take it out. Simple as that really. There is no room in any school to bow to any ridiculous religion, be that Christianity or The Church of Body Modification. It's all a load of tosh and the sooner we start to piss on their religious 'rights' the better.

 

[Checkmite]

Generally speaking, students who wish to claim exemption from school attendance and dress code regulations based on obscure religious beliefs that school administrators wouldn't reasonably be expected to be familiar with can be asked to present evidence of their actual participation in the religion and it's services. This is to prevent ostensibly non-JW kids from suddenly pretending to convert in order to score a day off, for example. Or someone who wants to wear body piercings finding a church on the Internet and claiming to be a devout adherent.

 

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

She should just take it out. Simple as that really. There is no room in any school to bow to any ridiculous religion, be that Christianity or The Church of Body Modification. It's all a load of tosh and the sooner we start to piss on their religious 'rights' the better.

But if a teenager wore those things just cause she liked them and wanted to be rebellious and the school made her take them out and suspended her, you'd be crying "freedom of expression" and "narrow minded bourgeois values", right?

It's not "bowing" to anything to let someone practice it on her own body, if she so wishes, when it affects no one but herself and starts and ends at herself.

If she, say, wanted to pierce and stud all of the OTHER students, whether they actually wanted it or not, now THAT would be another story.

 

[commandlinegamer]

It would nice to see more and more of these 'churches' appear, until there's a critical mass of people who realise that religion is bunk. My fear though, is that the capacity of humans to believe in the stupid tends toward the infinite.

 

[C_Felix]

Generally speaking, students who wish to claim exemption from school attendance and dress code regulations based on obscure religious beliefs that school administrators wouldn't reasonably be expected to be familiar with can be asked to present evidence of their actual participation in the religion and it's services. This is to prevent ostensibly non-JW kids from suddenly pretending to convert in order to score a day off, for example. Or someone who wants to wear body piercings finding a church on the Internet and claiming to be a devout adherent.

The article stated that the principal read up on the religion/churh and still told her to remove it.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

But if a teenager wore those things just cause she liked them and wanted to be rebellious and the school made her take them out and suspended her, you'd be crying "freedom of expression" and "narrow minded bourgeois values", right?

It's not "bowing" to anything to let someone practice it on her own body, if she so wishes, when it affects no one but herself and starts and ends at herself.

If she, say, wanted to pierce and stud all of the OTHER students, whether they actually wanted it or not, now THAT would be another story.

Dunno, in quite a few places -- and if anyone asks _my_ opinion too -- it being a religion only makes it worse. We forbid people to display religious symbols in a lot of places, sometimes even schools. I'd be for her wearing as many piercings as she wants, if she's just into potential infection entry points , but if it's worn as a religious symbol, then it better not be visible.

So basically, meh, thanks Church of Body Modification for ruining it for everyone

 

[TragicMonkey]

I guess I'm crazy, but I would like schools to stop and consider whether it actually matters and is worth making a fuss about what students wear in their noses. Does it really affect their education, or the education of the other students? If so, then how? If not, then why waste time worrying about it?

I have a terrible habit of expecting rules to make sense and serve a functional purpose, and not just be arbitrary displays of authority.

 

[dirtywick]

But if a teenager wore those things just cause she liked them and wanted to be rebellious and the school made her take them out and suspended her, you'd be crying "freedom of expression" and "narrow minded bourgeois values", right?

It's not "bowing" to anything to let someone practice it on her own body, if she so wishes, when it affects no one but herself and starts and ends at herself.

If she, say, wanted to pierce and stud all of the OTHER students, whether they actually wanted it or not, now THAT would be another story.

I don't agree with reasoning behind welshdean's post. That said, she can still have her nose, or any other part of her body for that matter, pierced. Just can't wear the piercing at school, among many other requirements. Part of school is to prepare students for adult life, and a lot of jobs have dress codes.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Part of school is to prepare students for adult life, and a lot of jobs have dress codes.

And if those dress codes can't be defended with rational argument, they should be done away with. Some dress codes are reasonable. Others are not.

I've worked several places that had "casual Friday", but none of them could explain the justification for not allowing casual dress the other four days of the week. They can't say it's because "dressing nicely improves performance" because if that were true, they are willingly taking a hit in productivity 20% of the time. And if it's to impress people, who are we impressing? I can see if your job involves interacting with customers, but if you work in a cube farm with the same coworkers all week and never, ever see the public, then why?

Except questioning things is insubordinate, and expecting there to be reasons for things is not being a team player. Toe the line, don't question why, don't examine, don't look for reasons, don't think. Oh, and for bringing it up at all you're a baby and ought to grow up.

Dress codes piss me off when there's not justification for them.

 

[Uncayimmy]

The Church of Body Modification
http://uscobm.com is a federally recogozied church.

From the above link, at the FAQ section:

They are a little cagey about their tax exempt status. I couldn't find them in Guidestar. Nowhere does it say donations are tax deductible - not even the store where you can donate to cover web hosting costs. Wiki says you have to e-mail the president to get the EIN.

They could be a non-profit. The JREF is a non-profit. That doesn't make them a church, does it?

 

[C_Felix]

They are a little cagey about their tax exempt status. I couldn't find them in Guidestar. Nowhere does it say donations are tax deductible - not even the store where you can donate to cover web hosting costs. Wiki says you have to e-mail the president to get the EIN.

They could be a non-profit. The JREF is a non-profit. That doesn't make them a church, does it?

Beats the hell outta me!

But, they are claiming they are gonna sue the school system.

That should be intresting.

 

[the_smasher]

I guess I'm crazy, but I would like schools to stop and consider whether it actually matters and is worth making a fuss about what students wear in their noses. Does it really affect their education, or the education of the other students? If so, then how? If not, then why waste time worrying about it?

I have a terrible habit of expecting rules to make sense and serve a functional purpose, and not just be arbitrary displays of authority.

I recall a school in my area claiming that a nose piercing is more likely to cause bleeding when bumped or hit than ear piercing, so they banned nose but not ear piercings. I don't know if that's correct or not, or if the NC school in the story used that reasoning in their dress code policy.

 

[quadraginta]

I wonder if this thread ought to be merged with the other one?

 

[TragicMonkey]

I recall a school in my area claiming that a nose piercing is more likely to cause bleeding when bumped or hit than ear piercing, so they banned nose but not ear piercings. I don't know if that's correct or not, or if the NC school in the story used that reasoning in their dress code policy.

Sounds like a claim that can be tested. At least they should be able to provide some evidence for this. Data, counts of bleeding injuries, etc. If they can't back up that claim, then they'll have to come up with another BS excuse to pretend is reasoning behind it.

 

[Checkmite]

The article stated that the principal read up on the religion/churh and still told her to remove it.

Obviously he was unconvinced.

 

[dirtywick]

And if those dress codes can't be defended with rational argument, they should be done away with. Some dress codes are reasonable. Others are not.

I've worked several places that had "casual Friday", but none of them could explain the justification for not allowing casual dress the other four days of the week. They can't say it's because "dressing nicely improves performance" because if that were true, they are willingly taking a hit in productivity 20% of the time. And if it's to impress people, who are we impressing? I can see if your job involves interacting with customers, but if you work in a cube farm with the same coworkers all week and never, ever see the public, then why?

Except questioning things is insubordinate, and expecting there to be reasons for things is not being a team player. Toe the line, don't question why, don't examine, don't look for reasons, don't think. Oh, and for bringing it up at all you're a baby and ought to grow up.

Dress codes piss me off when there's not justification for them.

Well sure, and don't get me wrong I agree dress codes should be reasonable and I'm not going to defend a statement otherwise, but it's probably more practical to teach kids how things are and prepare them for life as an adult at a time when there's not any real consequences.

I mean, you follow(ed) your dress code at work on non-casual days even though you disagreed with it. This girl will likely have to at times as well, arbitrary or not.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

Ah, Clayton. Miss it. A bit.

Regardless, the Principle will probably go for the disruption route.

 

[I Am The Scum]

This actually isn't a case of religious discrimination. Under certain circumstances, it could be. For example, if the dress code also stated "no necklaces," but the school provided an exemption for crucifixes, and they did not allow a similar exemption for nose piercings, then you might have a chase. As far as I can tell, the school is treating all religions identically, which is the opposite of discrimination.

On the other hand, a policy can be itself discriminatory towards religion. If the code allowed baseball caps but not turbans, then it stands to reason that the policy is possibly being made with the intent of curtailing certain religious garb. However, I seriously doubt that is the case, here.