In theory, I support her side of it. There are a few big "but"s here though.

(I said "but"s, not butts!)

1) I think there is a real issue of a religion of convenience. I.e. rather than really following a religion out of belief in it, a group of people are using one as a way of claiming rights by pretending they're part of a religion.

2) The religious requirements - I don't think it should cover a preference anyway, which is what the nose ring sounds like. It should only cover something required by the religion like a Sikh's dagger etc.

3) Frankly, I'm kind of wary of a religion that involves under age people being pierced, tattoed or physically altered in a way that isn't for medical reasons. That sort of think should be for them to get when they are considered to be old enough to make adult choices. So I'd ban the thing anyway on those grounds