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?
280K
1.82K
762
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
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 279
All I have to say is 670-1 next they will want pink beret's I just don't get it I guess I was taught old school army
(1)
(0)
We must never sacrifice discipline, standards and obligation to our country to which we swore to defend for political correctness. This Gentlemen took an oath to adhere to our standard....
(1)
(0)
One more example of "I want to serve my country but only on my terms." Let me guess - the judge deciding the case never served either....right? Probably never heard of good order and discipline. There's a reason why less than1% of the population chooses to serve....standards and rules. Then again maybe I'm just some old Marine that's not in tune with current culture.
(1)
(0)
SSG Bryan Van Hoose
Most of us "Old School" have retired Gunny. Remember when they changed PT standards? I never had a problem running my 2 miles to get the 100 points, but soldiers complained that it was "too hard" when all it took was a little more training and for the individual to learn how to push themselves to go a little farther.
(0)
(0)
You change regs for one religion, you'll end up having to change more for others as well. It makes no sense to allow this into our military. If you want to join then you must adhere to the same standards every man or woman has adhered to for the last 240 years.
(1)
(0)
SSG Martin Reyna
Good one. We should just call it a militia and let everyone dress, act and groom as they please..
(0)
(0)
CH (CPT) (Join to see)
Traditionally, the Amish are pacifists, so it's not an issue. However, if the policy was consistent, then the Army would have to welcome that 'stache-free chinstrap beard
(0)
(0)
Yes this is an overreach by the court. In recent years there has been an organized movement to remove religion for the military. My issue with this case is strait up he will be a distraction wherever he goes if you want to serve in the military you do so like everyone else, you cut your hair, shave, and maintain your uniform like everyone else. The military is not the place for special; if you want to be special do something else.
(1)
(0)
What I believe is that the Army standards, and requirements are just that. Yes its too far. Call it what you want but yes way too fucking far.
(1)
(0)
this is ridiculous. If you can not adhere to the rules and regulations of AR 670-1 then why should we make an exception because of faith. The military as a whole must look uniform and the same, it has nothing to do with religion but everything with rule discipline and regulation. This decision is going way to far and will eventually weaken the force structure. The regulation states the reason why we cannot have beards is it can hinder the way our ppe will fit. If that is true then his beard will get in the way of his gas mask and helmet straps and will become a casualty during an event where he will need a gas mask. This is like saying let a Taliban member in because of religious freedom they have the right to there opinion. what ever happened to being American and protect our interests rather than being weak and politically correct?
(1)
(0)
MSG Reid Stone
And during all those yrs in Iraq and Afghanistan how many Army personnel wore their pro mask?! Many, many times they put them away and US Marines were the ones still wearing theirs while 'outside the wire'. In non field environments the special ops personnel conform and most are pretty sharp in appearance so let them do their jobs whether they are SEALS/Raiders/Green Berets or Air Force personnel.
(0)
(0)
If the man can't (or won't) conform to the Army's standards, he is incapable of meeting the requirements. Period. The first duty incumbent upon a leader is to place his mission ahead of himself. Clearly any person who will not conform to rules and regulations is demonstrating their unwillingness to do that.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next