Xoxi Munoz

Shelton 1st
12/1/14
News Writing Prompt 2
Sophomore Stacy Carol refused to remove her lip piercing as her First Amendment right to
exercise religion freely is being violated. On April 10, the school will set a disciplinary hearing regarding
Carols direct violations to the dress code.
Carol and her mother, Lareina, both belong to the Church of Body Modification an Interfaith
church which holds the belief that one can freely experience the divine through modifications.
Our spirituality comes from what we choose to do to ourselves, said Stacy.
Not all members withhold a facial piercing. This religion claims to have over 3,500 members in
the United States as well as a formal process into accepting new members. Stacy and her mother have
only recently joined. The local sector of the American Civil Liberties Union has complied to defend Stacy
at the hearing.
When we created this dress code in 2009, the district sought input from the students, faculty and
community members, superintendent Parker Gordon said. Facial jewelry did not make the cut.
The dress code bans all facial piercing besides ears on females. However, the dress code also bans
headwear and hats, but two Muslim students have been excused to continue wearing their hijabs.
I dont think you can compare the Muslim religion to the Church of Body Modification. We
have a rich and long history, junior, Amina Shakuri said. There are more than a billion Muslims
worldwide.
Two weeks ago, Stacy was suspended for three days for wearing her piercing then another nine
days for returning after her suspension with the piercing on.
The piercing is apart of Stacys religion. My daughter wants to go to class, but she also doesnt
want her First Amendment rights trampled,said Lareina.
The violation of ones First Amendment right is the most common complaint throughout the
business of Law. Freedom of Religion is the main plea for the violation of the amendment.

Just because a few people get together and call themselves a church doesnt mean they are a
church in the eyes of the law. Heck, in Australia, there is a movement for a Jedi church. Does that mean
we have to allow all teenage boys to wear Jedi Knight robes and carry lightsabers to school? said
constitutional lawyer Jett Ramirez.

The minister of the local Church of Body Modification, Stacys minister, declined to comment,
Stacy has a solid case, said ACLU lawyer Sonia Stephens.The district doesnt have much to
stand on since it already has two religious exemptions on file.
This civil court case has come to the battle of the citizens right to the First Amendment and
ones perspective of the Church of Body Modification.
Most Americans would be surprised to learn how little protection the First Amendment provides
for a religious-freedom claims under current law, said Ramirez. The U.S. Supreme Court seriously
weakened the reach of the free-exercise clause in 1990 by ruling that the government no longer must
show a compelling state interest before denying a religious exemption to an otherwise neutral, generally
applicable law.