Posted on Jun 16, 2015
Sikh Wins Court Case To Join ROTC: Is this a victory for religious freedom or did the court go too far?
279K
1.82K
774
33
32
1
A Federal Judge has ruled that Iknoor Singh's adherence to his Sikh faith - wearing facial hair, keeping his hair long, but wrapped in a turban, and carrying a sharp knife on his person - would not diminish his capacity to serve the nation he loves, the United States of America, as a future Officer in the United States Army. Do you feel too many allowances are being made for his faith or do you feel he should be welcomed into the ranks if he can successfully fulfill the requirements for Commissioning? What say you, RP?
--
(Note: Full article added by RP Staff.)
MINEOLA, NY — A Sikh college student from New York said Monday he is excited about a federal court decision that will permit him to enroll in the U.S. Army's Reserve Officer Training Corps without shaving his beard, cutting his hair, or removing his turban.
U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued the ruling Friday in Washington, D.C., saying 20-year-old Iknoor Singh's adherence to his religious beliefs would not diminish his ability to serve in the military.
"I didn't believe it at first when I heard about the decision," said Singh, who lives in the New York City borough of Queens.
He told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Monday: "It was kind of surreal. This is something I have been fighting for for two or three years. I'm excited and nervous; very excited to learn."
Singh, who will be a junior next fall studying finance and business analytics at Hofstra University on Long Island, said he has had a lifelong interest in public service. He speaks four languages — English, Punjabi, Hindi, and Urdu — and he said he wants to work in military intelligence.
"Becoming an officer is not an easy thing," he conceded. "You have to be proficient in many areas."
Sikhism, a 500-year-old religion founded in India, requires its male followers to wear a turban and beard and keep their hair uncut.
Under a policy announced last year, troops can seek waivers on a case-by-case basis to wear religious clothing, seek prayer time or engage in religious practices. Approval depends on where the service member is stationed and whether the change would affect military readiness or the mission.
Currently, only a few Sikhs serve in the U.S. Army who have been granted religious accommodations.
In her ruling, Jackson said, "It is difficult to see how accommodating plaintiff's religious exercise would do greater damage to the Army's compelling interests in uniformity, discipline, credibility, unit cohesion, and training than the tens of thousands of medical shaving profiles the Army has already granted."
Army spokesman, Lt. Col. Ben Garrett, said in a statement the decision is currently being examined. "The Army takes pride in sustaining a culture where all personnel are treated with dignity and respect and not discriminated against based on race, color, religion, gender and national origin," he said.
Hofstra spokeswoman Karla Schuster said in a statement that the university "supports Mr. Singh's desire to serve his country, as well as his right to religious expression and practice. We are pleased that the courts have affirmed that he can do both as a member of the ROTC."
Gurjot Kaur, senior staff attorney for the Sikh Coalition, said the decision was "an important victory in the fight for religious freedom. We urge the Pentagon to eliminate the discriminatory loopholes in its policies and give all Americans an equal opportunity to serve in our nation's armed forces."
The American Civil Liberties Union and a group called United Sikhs jointly represented Singh in the case.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/sikh-student-queens-clear-join-army-rotc-article-1.2259423
--
(Note: Full article added by RP Staff.)
MINEOLA, NY — A Sikh college student from New York said Monday he is excited about a federal court decision that will permit him to enroll in the U.S. Army's Reserve Officer Training Corps without shaving his beard, cutting his hair, or removing his turban.
U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued the ruling Friday in Washington, D.C., saying 20-year-old Iknoor Singh's adherence to his religious beliefs would not diminish his ability to serve in the military.
"I didn't believe it at first when I heard about the decision," said Singh, who lives in the New York City borough of Queens.
He told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Monday: "It was kind of surreal. This is something I have been fighting for for two or three years. I'm excited and nervous; very excited to learn."
Singh, who will be a junior next fall studying finance and business analytics at Hofstra University on Long Island, said he has had a lifelong interest in public service. He speaks four languages — English, Punjabi, Hindi, and Urdu — and he said he wants to work in military intelligence.
"Becoming an officer is not an easy thing," he conceded. "You have to be proficient in many areas."
Sikhism, a 500-year-old religion founded in India, requires its male followers to wear a turban and beard and keep their hair uncut.
Under a policy announced last year, troops can seek waivers on a case-by-case basis to wear religious clothing, seek prayer time or engage in religious practices. Approval depends on where the service member is stationed and whether the change would affect military readiness or the mission.
Currently, only a few Sikhs serve in the U.S. Army who have been granted religious accommodations.
In her ruling, Jackson said, "It is difficult to see how accommodating plaintiff's religious exercise would do greater damage to the Army's compelling interests in uniformity, discipline, credibility, unit cohesion, and training than the tens of thousands of medical shaving profiles the Army has already granted."
Army spokesman, Lt. Col. Ben Garrett, said in a statement the decision is currently being examined. "The Army takes pride in sustaining a culture where all personnel are treated with dignity and respect and not discriminated against based on race, color, religion, gender and national origin," he said.
Hofstra spokeswoman Karla Schuster said in a statement that the university "supports Mr. Singh's desire to serve his country, as well as his right to religious expression and practice. We are pleased that the courts have affirmed that he can do both as a member of the ROTC."
Gurjot Kaur, senior staff attorney for the Sikh Coalition, said the decision was "an important victory in the fight for religious freedom. We urge the Pentagon to eliminate the discriminatory loopholes in its policies and give all Americans an equal opportunity to serve in our nation's armed forces."
The American Civil Liberties Union and a group called United Sikhs jointly represented Singh in the case.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/sikh-student-queens-clear-join-army-rotc-article-1.2259423
Religion
ROTC
Diversity
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 282
2
2
0
My opinion is that when you sign over to join the army, you signed over knowing what you are going to do and what simple standards you have to keep when you join.(I say simple as in common knowledge of clean cut and shaven). If your religion conflicts with the discipline and standards with the military do not join, it's as simple as that. If you can use your religion as a scapegoat from following the standards, don't bother joining.
(2)
(0)
Suspended Profile
My platoon sergeant and section chief back in 1973 was then SSG Paramjit Sibia, who a 24M Vulcan air defense system mechanic while keeping his beard and long hair and wearing a drab olive-green turban. I later met him again back in 1992 at Redstone Arsenal as a SGM. Sibia was an outstanding soldier, leader, and mentor. And I can say that I am a better solider and person for knowing him. He was profiled in a 1976 article in SOLDIERS magazine.
2
2
0
There should have been no court case as the ARs allow the beard and turban for Sikhs. The cadet command obviously wanted to make it difficult for this young man.
As far as the courts are concerned , yes, they have authority to interpret law concerning the military as well as every other aspect of ggovernment.
Herman Cain really?
As far as the courts are concerned , yes, they have authority to interpret law concerning the military as well as every other aspect of ggovernment.
Herman Cain really?
(2)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
LTC Bink Romanick, Sir, that's the thing really has me baffled as well: why did they force this young man to take this to court, since we already have precedence for the accommodation of this faith in our history? Whoever pushed this case in that direction (only to lose) should rightfully be handed his or her relief for cause OER.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I can't count the number of people I've know who 1) wouldn't/couldn't join because they had some issue that would not conform to regulation; 2) served their initial contract and ETSed for the same reason; or 3) were forced out, sometimes under charges, for non-conforming behavior or appearance that was perfectly sane and legitimate outside the military. The military is a special, non-democratic part of our Republic where human rights are suspended in order to allow us to effectively defend the rights of our citizens. In other words, they don't get to kill people and destroy their stuff and we do, but they get to have beards, pierce things, etc, and we don't. It has to be that way or we become ineffective. It's just another case of changing the standard that makes us unified and strong in order to make a few people happy.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
If he want to wear a turban, and facial hair without medical reasons, he should join a military other than the United States of America. What is next? Why not just abolish the regulations that pertains to the wearing of the uniform and military appearance, and just let anyone come as they please? Why not allow members to just wear blue jeans and tennis shoes if they please? Really, this have absolutely nothing to do with religion. I would love to see him seal his gas mask wearing a turban and all that facial hair. Rules and regulations are made to be adhered to. I wonder how many member of the court that made this ruling served? They got it wrong!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
This is not about religious freedom, this is about favoritism. I can't wear long hair and a beard but this guy can because he's Sikh? Rules are there for a reason, not for convenience.
(2)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
Apples and oranges Lt Col (Join to see). Those men have to shave and cut their hair when not deployed. Sikh personnel get to keep theirs all the time.
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
So explain to me why the deployed environment should be more permissive. Is not unit cohesion and discipline MORE important in combat than in garrison?
(0)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
Honestly I have no clue Lt Col (Join to see). I was a Fleet Sailor so we didn't have the same type of deployed environment as these types of men. My personal uninformed opinion is that rules are rules and should be followed. Once we start making exceptions (like for Sikhs), everybody else is going to start saying "Hey... How come they're so special?" and start pushing the envelope on grooming and other standards.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I don’t see a major issue with this. The military has many rules that don’t have much to do with fighting abilities. That said wearing long hair, while I don’t like it myself and short hair is certainly more manageable in the field is no big deal. Women can have long hair so what’s up with that? Beards? Again I don’t see much of an issue there. The excuse about the Pro-mask, well I’ve operated in them and frankly if you actually find yourself needing a Pro-mask in a field environment you’re pretty hosed already. That thing will not stay sealed while conducting operations other than running away slowly and carefully. The knife, hell we should all be wearing sharp knives.
My only issue is that it should not be a religious issue but a common sense issue where we attract and keep the very best warriors. Appearance standards should certainly be about a neat and professional appearance and not hinder the ability of the soldier to do the job.
Now I do think generally, soldiers with a clean shave, neat haircut and no tattoos looks better in uniform but that’s just a personal preference. Heck, I’ll work with “Rasta Joe”, if he can put rounds on target.
A neat and professional appearance is important to the “good order and morale”, but that standard can be met with Hair, beards, and knives for EVERYONE.
My only issue is that it should not be a religious issue but a common sense issue where we attract and keep the very best warriors. Appearance standards should certainly be about a neat and professional appearance and not hinder the ability of the soldier to do the job.
Now I do think generally, soldiers with a clean shave, neat haircut and no tattoos looks better in uniform but that’s just a personal preference. Heck, I’ll work with “Rasta Joe”, if he can put rounds on target.
A neat and professional appearance is important to the “good order and morale”, but that standard can be met with Hair, beards, and knives for EVERYONE.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
The court went to far in this ruling, again placing the interests of a single individual over the policies that are in place to ensure the good order and discipline of the whole.
I thought the whole idea of a uniform was to promote uniformity. There's a place for religious individuality... Last line of your dog tags.
I thought the whole idea of a uniform was to promote uniformity. There's a place for religious individuality... Last line of your dog tags.
(2)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
So, what was your reaction to allowing a Sikh to join the active duty Army with the same turban and beard?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
(0)
(0)
SPC David Hannaman
Same thing... "I thought the whole idea of a uniform was to promote uniformity. There's a place for religious individuality... Last line of your dog tags."
I don't have people with wearing just about anything... fat girl in spandex, kids with their pants falling down, women in Burka, rockstar wearing priest collar, thirteen year old girls in mini skirts, teenage boys in part of a uniform, white trash men in filthy "wife beater" shirts... all offend me on some reason for different reasons, but I'm not going to complain... in fact I'll defend their right to wear it. MY kids know I'll hand them their ass though.
I don't have people with wearing just about anything... fat girl in spandex, kids with their pants falling down, women in Burka, rockstar wearing priest collar, thirteen year old girls in mini skirts, teenage boys in part of a uniform, white trash men in filthy "wife beater" shirts... all offend me on some reason for different reasons, but I'm not going to complain... in fact I'll defend their right to wear it. MY kids know I'll hand them their ass though.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
As a Mormon in the Army I was made fun of and somewhat persecuted by those in my unit, until several of our higher ranking NCO's turned out to be Mormon as well. Most of the comments I have read on this topic is about uniform, military customs and dress codes. If anyone here studies military history you will find that many of the things you consider as tradition are fairly new. The military is changing every day. The one constant thing is change in our lives. We have excluded people from serving their country because we have a perception of what a soldier should be. I have been fortunate to have worked with many foreign militaries over my years in service, and see how they operate. We have the greatest military force in the world, but we need to adapt new ways if we want to improve what we have. The Sikhs have been know for many centuries as great warriors, and being very dedicated to the armies they fight for. The military gets rid of soldiers all the time for dress and appearance, whether they can pass a physical training test or not. Body mass seems to be the big issue, and how we look. This is not Cosmopolitan, this is the United States Military. I have seen soldiers who followed every guideline the service had, and even scored 300 on their PT test, and get booted because the body fat was .05% over their requirement. The military needs to change, and stop holding on to some customs because we want to look pretty. These arguments were made about women serving in the military 6 decades ago, and look how far they have come. Although it should be farther by now. The good ole boy military is in the days of past. We need a military that can perform in the 21st century and not hold on to the 19th century.
(2)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
SFC David Pope, MBA, you are right and well said, also I am sorry for my jokes about the underwear. Life has taught me that I was wrong about the idiot beliefs I held.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Not a big news to me. I have seen Sikhs in the army. There was a Sikh doctor(CPT) at Womack Army Medical Center at Fort Bragg when I was there. He deployed to Afghanistan. There a Jewish kid with a skull cap in my Battery in basic training at Fort Sill. As a future Rastafarian I see nothing wrong with this.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google