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
759
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: 278
I don't see how this situation fits into any of the narrow categories the poll choices describe.
Sikh's have served in the US Armed forces for at least the last one hundred years and have been allowed to retain turban, beard, etc. to conform with their faith. The lawsuit was brought because current regulations allow application for waiver after the service member has joined, but does not allow for application of waiver prior to joining. If the lawsuit route had not been followed by Iknoor Singh, he would have had to do away with the beard, turban, hair, kurpan, etc. which is forbidden: " The initiate is required to wear the physical symbols of a Khalsa at all times as well as follow the Khalsa Code of Conduct." http://www.sikhs.org/khalsa.htm So, ultimately, I see this as a means to allow him to serve, the same way many of us have found ways to overcome obstacles or objections that may have precluded us to serve.
Many of the responses I have read speak of conformity. Those of you that have tats, do you all have the same ones? Why not? Others have spoken about the slippery slope...been there, done that, i.e. women fighter pilots, women in infantry units, etc. Korea era and earlier, the armed forces were going to fall apart if mixed color units were allowed. From my perspective, it has always been and always will be a question of can the person do the job expected and required of him/her/it?
Sometimes you just have to color outside the lines.
Sikh's have served in the US Armed forces for at least the last one hundred years and have been allowed to retain turban, beard, etc. to conform with their faith. The lawsuit was brought because current regulations allow application for waiver after the service member has joined, but does not allow for application of waiver prior to joining. If the lawsuit route had not been followed by Iknoor Singh, he would have had to do away with the beard, turban, hair, kurpan, etc. which is forbidden: " The initiate is required to wear the physical symbols of a Khalsa at all times as well as follow the Khalsa Code of Conduct." http://www.sikhs.org/khalsa.htm So, ultimately, I see this as a means to allow him to serve, the same way many of us have found ways to overcome obstacles or objections that may have precluded us to serve.
Many of the responses I have read speak of conformity. Those of you that have tats, do you all have the same ones? Why not? Others have spoken about the slippery slope...been there, done that, i.e. women fighter pilots, women in infantry units, etc. Korea era and earlier, the armed forces were going to fall apart if mixed color units were allowed. From my perspective, it has always been and always will be a question of can the person do the job expected and required of him/her/it?
Sometimes you just have to color outside the lines.
![](https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/link_data_pictures/images/000/016/166/qrc/Sikhs_org1.png?1443045427)
Sikhism Religion of the Sikh People
Who and What is a Khalsa? "He who keeps alight the unquenchable torch of truth, and never swerves from the thought of One God; he who has full love and confidence in God and does not put his faith, even by mistake, in fasting or the graves of Muslim saints, Hindu crematoriums, or Jogis places of sepulchre; he who recognises the One God and no pilgrimages, alms-giving, non-destruction of life, penances, or austerities; and in whose heart the...
(1)
(0)
MAJ Paul Hoiland, would you have asked if it was a so called Christian demanding that all must swore an oath on the bible. This is not about religious freedom is about serving and not about the false belief policies that are in place to ensure the good order and discipline of the whole, it is about using common sense.
(1)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
Capt Jeff Schwager, Look at the news, a misguided Christian participates in prayer at a Black Church then proceeds to kill 9 people, because they are Black. Please apply We are thy Brother's Keeper, as you comment, don't add to the hate.
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
MSgt Paul Anderson, I take it you have issues telling the truth about how religious liberty is misused. Care to dialogue?
(0)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
CPT Pedro Meza, How does one get into Civil Affairs? Do they have any entrance requirements or do they simply take anyone with a pulse? Does walking into a church make one a Christian? Was Dylann Roof's intention prayer, or was he planning to kill people in the church because he wanted to start a race war and was pretty confident that a bunch of black Christians praying would be a soft target? You are argumentative and don't even make logical connections in your diatribes. It's difficult to take you seriously.
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
Capt Jeff Schwager, You can easily answer all your questions, “black Christians praying would be a soft target”, good to see that you recognize that. Now about “make logical connections”, you cannot deny the fact that those of you that Claim to be Christians use the phrase religious liberty to justify forcing others to follow your beliefs. There is no “projecting falsehoods at a religious group” if you claim to be Christian then follow the teachings of the Jesus Teacher called Jesus and practice Love thy Neighbor that includes this Sikh, and also all gay, lesbian, or transgender service members. Apply your religious beliefs to yourself and not others. This Sikh can join the ARMY just the same way others Sikhs have joined and stop making an issue about the way Sikhs relate to God, because it is the same God you worship.
(0)
(0)
This is crazy, the ultimate reason for the military is defense....there is a need for discipline and conformity.....that is part of the military! It helps in combat to distinguish your troops from others.....The PC thing is going to far!!!
(1)
(0)
Wow! This is the United States Military not some social experiment. So if he is wearing a turban how does that look for uniformity and professionalism? Carrying a weapon (knife) in the work place, is that OK while others are not able too? The whole religion excuse is being abused by all faiths and we should be careful with how the military moves forward with this.
(1)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
You do know that we have Sikhs already on active duty, right? http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
(0)
(0)
MCPO Keith Kaui
Jason,
I do, and i am sure they excelled within the service but assimilated to the U.S. Military culture. As i mentioned before, i applaud and respect anyone who raises their right hand to serve their country.
I do, and i am sure they excelled within the service but assimilated to the U.S. Military culture. As i mentioned before, i applaud and respect anyone who raises their right hand to serve their country.
(0)
(0)
PO2 Kevin O'Connor
MCPO Keith Kaui - (Keith) Master Chief. Thank you for thinking I may still be young, but that boat sailed about as long ago as my first Med Cruise in 78'. Past the 55 mark awhile ago. Any way, as an RP I was required to provide religious support to all personnel, no matter what I thought. That to me is one of the great things about Military life. We take the values "Freedom" to heart. We stand up for others rights even if they aren't our own. Yes we are a voluntary service, but the idea of "You don't have personal rights or freedoms in the service" was starting to be outdated thinking when I went through Boot Camp in 77'. Yes there has to structure and rules and regulations, but any service member will be able to tell you that you also have to be flexible and at time modify your plans and thinking.
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
MCPO Keith Kaui - Well, the person in this particular story petitioned, and was approved, to keep the turban and the beard. I'm not sure why we would deny that to an ROTC student when we clearly are willing to allow it on active duty.
(0)
(0)
It should be left up to the joint chiefs not to politicians or for that matter appointed/elected judges.
(1)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
Well, the Army allowed two Sikhs to commission back in 2010...so really, this is dragging the ROTC detachment into line with current Army practice.
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
So...was allowing other members of his religion to serve on active duty also an act of political correctness? Or is the court merely making ROTC follow the same guidelines already set out by the Army?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
(1)
(0)
SGT Robert Hawks
Was unaware that the Army ever allowed turbans. I went to basic in June 1984 and served till March 1997. Never once heard of it ever so I stand corrected.
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
SGT Robert Hawks, look it up Sikh have served since WWI. I served from 1974-2015 and yes I saw Sikhs, I guess is a more about where you served.
(0)
(0)
In my opinion, definitely went way too far. Our rules and policies have been in place far to long to start bending and breaking them now. Reguardless of the flac I receive, I would not serve with this individual. WE ARE STILL AMERICA, at least for now!
(1)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
You are correct...we are America, the melting pot, a country with express and specific prohibitions on requiring any kind of religious test for public office, including the military.
Also, if you are unwilling to serve with this cadet, it may be time to get out...because there are already members of his faith on active duty.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
Also, if you are unwilling to serve with this cadet, it may be time to get out...because there are already members of his faith on active duty.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125142736
(0)
(0)
SFC Collin McMillion
I am out, for a long time now, but I still miss active duty. What I don't miss is all the exceptions being made to the rules of the military I loved and shed blood for. We are not a melting pot, we have become a witches' cauldron.
(1)
(0)
The military has had restrictions since day one. Height,weight,disabilities,etc.These restrictions are for the welfare of all service personel.Either you have a rule for all,or you have no rule. I, for one ,am very disappointed with our military.We have removed ourselves from being an elite force to be reckoned with ,to a catch all club.This is not about an accepted religion.This is about every body gets a trophy.Next we will only take in people that eat liver. That immediately washes me out.I mean no disrespect,but it has to stop somewhere. I don`t want to be in a firefight and look around and my battle buddy is rubbing his elbows with dirt because it`s his religion.
(1)
(0)
Love how the army is becoming do what ever the fuck you want....soooo happy im a veteran......
(1)
(0)
SPC Larry Boutwell
All im saying is that we all know the army is reactive... Not proactive.... Meaning... The regulation s in place....for the most part have a really good reason for being there....
(0)
(0)
Read This Next