Posted on Jun 16, 2015
MAJ Senior Observer   Controller/Trainer
279K
1.82K
774
33
32
1
Iknoor singh 600x400
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
Posted in these groups: World religions 2 ReligionThcapm08l9 ROTCDiversity Diversity
Avatar feed
See Results
Responses: 282
SGT Alan Simmons
0
0
0
Now it has been some time since I was in basic training, but I remember a drill sergeant telling us that the reason that the U.S. Army had decided to go to a clean-shaven requirement was not just for the uniformity and appearance issues, but because of one fact that was learned during both WWI and WWII and during subsequent testing throughout the Cold War- the gas mask/protective masks do not create an air-tight seal in the presence of facial hair.

He may have won his victory to wear facial hair, but if our troops ever are faced with the prospect of biological/chemical agents, I wonder how many troops we will needlessly lose because they wanted a beard...
(0)
Comment
(0)
GySgt William Hardy
GySgt William Hardy
>1 y
Your argument is flawed on many levels. As SPC Dan Schepers points out, military members from other countries are allowed long hair and beards and have no problems. Besides, Sikhs must pass all the same standards of military training as you do and can seal their masks.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Harold Piet
0
0
0
This is as stupid as the rest of the decisions they have been making lately. Transgender, gay rights, christian bashing.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO3 Executive Assistant
0
0
0
Can he affix a gas mask in case of NBC attack and maintain a seal? Not likely. I don't think someone's religious preferences should take precedence over their ability to serve effectively. If he's going for a commission, he should know better. I see him as being less interested in actually serving the Army as he is in making a statement for his faith. That's all well and good when it's not potentially damaging the combat readiness of whatever unit he's attached to, especially if he has the talent of knowing so many languages. If he truly was interested in serving for altruistic purposes, he would understand that his faith will make concessions to serve the greater good.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
60b07000
51faa1be
This guy seemed to do alright. http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/125142736/sikhs-regain-right-to-wear-turbans-in-u-s-army

Also, tell me again about sealing gas masks in deployed locations?
(0)
Reply
(0)
PO3 Executive Assistant
PO3 (Join to see)
>1 y
I won't be fool enough to point out those men in isolated FOB's and shout that they're out of reg's. But you'll also notice that, even in the expanded transcript, they never go over the fact that no, neither those operators nor this Captain can maintain a seal. I'm not sure what situations he may or may not be exposed to, and neither does he, which is all the more reason for him to be as fit for full duty as any other member of the military.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC David Sulley
0
0
0
This is a load of crap, if love this country and you want to JOIN the Armed Forces, your not drafted anymore then FOLLOW THE UCMJ JACKASS. David Sulley 24G U.S.Army 81-85
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Van Henson
0
0
0
It seems to me that the judge and most everyone else has missed a more important point. He will be non-deployable to any conflict where Chemical/Biological weapons have a potential to be used.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Rick Duff
0
0
0
It CANT be a win for freedom of religion when jackwagons are court martialing a chaplain for doing HIS JOB!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
The chaplain's job is to support the religious needs of everyone in his command, not convert everyone in his command to his own religion.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Todd Lysfjord
0
0
0
You should be honored to get the privilege of adhering to the traditions and standards of our military by serving ...not the other way around!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Todd Lysfjord
0
0
0
The individual requesting the privilege to join the military should adhere to its standards and traditions...not the other way around.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Operations Nco
0
0
0
NO...plain and simple. Too many judges are getting away with legislating from the bench.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Aaron Baltosser
0
0
0
Edited >1 y ago
What an absolute miscarriage of justice. Even in the basic regulations you will find restrictions on how ladies wear their hair. Anything that prevents their services cover in a proper manner is strictly prohibited. Facial hair is a trait of an undisciplined service member with the exception of a PFB case. There is zero value in having the military structure bend to the will of a single individual using a different set of special consideration rules. Whenever you apply one rule for an individual, and a different set for the rest n an organization, you set yourself up for failure. This was a leadership failure in the court, and hopefully will be overturned on an appeal. With the Sikh faith there is one more interesting rub. Anyone in a BEQ or in his case a BOQ is restricted from having a knife over a certain length. In his case that regulation would have to be ignored as well since it is considered part of the faith and must be in his possession. Good grief Charlie Brown!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close