Posted on Jun 16, 2015
MAJ Senior Observer   Controller/Trainer
280K
1.82K
762
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: 279
CWO3 Retired
1
1
0
Does the Judge who made this ruling know her hsitory about our Armed Services and about one loses their civil identity once he or she volunteer for our Armed Forces? I have a recommendation, let her handle the Marine's case of unjustice or justice with his conviction of his crimes against humanity, whom will wipe the slate clean. I had an associate that used to work with me was murdered at Fort Hood, Texas by an Officer of the Army Medical Corps. Is this Justice? Ask his wife and children. JK
(1)
Comment
(0)
Maj Mike Sciales
Maj Mike Sciales
>1 y
A85e8feb
1959818d
You can't blame a Sikh for what a deranged Muslim physician did. That's like blaming the Jews for Killing Christ. IN re beards -- we have a long history of allowing beards, so I don't get your point.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
We allowed beards (and Sikhs) for much more of our history than we've prohibited them.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Agr Recruiter
1
1
0
I don't think we should accommodate anyone. I think they need to change the supplemented DODI 1300.17 WHICH States "Accommodation of Religious Practices within the Military Services". Approval for exceptions to policy are done on a case by case basis.


Just my $0.02
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Mikel Dawson
1
1
0
I think this political correctness is road apples! I'm glad I'm retired and don't have to deal with this junk any more. There's a reason the Army had standards, and I said had, I guess the Army will lower their standards for anything now.
(1)
Comment
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
TSgt Joshua Copeland
>1 y
SGM Mikel Dawson, your right, they had standards that allowed it till shortly after you came in (grandfathered all existing folks who didn't retire till as late as 2009 as a Col). It was only in the mid 80's did they change it. So really, it is just lowering it back to what it was back in the "old army".
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CH (CPT) Command and Unit Chaplain
1
1
0
This seems to be one of those rock and a hard place issues. As for the accommodation, the Constitution protects his right to freely practice his religion. Furthermore, his religious standards pre-date our Constitution. So I can understand how A judge would feel compelled to rule in this manner.

However, if I am reading these other posts correctly, the main complaint is not that we should not let him practice his religion, but that the established standards of an organization should not be changed for one person (a minority might be a better word choice here).

I have to say that I can see the merits of both sides of the argument, but I think this is and will be a relatively quiet issue in our ranks as soon as this thread dies down. So much for the doom and gloom "what other doors does this open up" argument. Issues will still be handled on a case-by-case basis and the vast majority of those will not make the news. Let's keep our heads people.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
Well, since there's already several serving on active duty, and since the Army policy was to let them keep the beard and turban up until 1984, I don't see the issue.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Clark Adams
1
1
0
What does uniform mean? Why do military personnel complete Basic Combat Training? Why should there be any standards in any area of military service?
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Hospital Corpsman
2
1
1
Welcome him with open arms! There's enough negativity, judgment and hate in this world! Let's be a part of the CHANGE!
(2)
Comment
(1)
Avatar small
SFC Terry Murphy
1
1
0
I don't care, but when he can't seal his protective mask, then he can be kicked out for being unable to meet the standards.
(1)
Comment
(0)
CPT Topher Murphy
CPT Topher Murphy
>1 y
The guy who went through my OBC class didn't have problems with sealing his mask
(1)
Reply
(0)
GySgt William Hardy
GySgt William Hardy
>1 y
The modifications are for the turban and hair, and not about whether or not a soldier can seat his gas mask. I do not know of any Sikh who had that problem. My instructor in my MI course didn't have any problems with any military standard and only sought exemption to shaving, haircuts, and wearing the turban. Since Sikhs are a well established religion, an exemption can be made.

I really don't understand what the fuss is about. Sikhs have served in the US military for a long time. This isn't something new. The Sikh soldier I had as an instructor was from New Mexico. His father had converted to Sikhism before he was born and he grew up a Sikh. I would not stop him from serving his country. By the way, he was a career soldier.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Fire Controlman
1
1
0
The military has the policies that are in place to ensure the good order and discipline of the whole for a reason. They are there to separate, so there is no conflict in the ranks regardless of beliefs or religion and to maintain uniformity. Those policies should remain in place and should not be altered unless the rules change for everyone the same way. If not then i believe that i shouldn't have to shave or cut my hair as well.
(1)
Comment
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
CPT Pedro Meza
>1 y
PO2 Anthony Reichelt, please reads history:One of the earliest Sikh soldiers in the American military was one Bhagat Singh Thind, who although not a U.S. citizen joined the United States Army and served in World War.
(0)
Reply
(0)
PO1 Fire Controlman
PO1 (Join to see)
>1 y
CPT, I fail to see you're point, If we are to continue to make exceptions to the rules then the military needs to for all religions. My point being as I started, we are all held to the same standers no mater what branch you are in http://www.npc.navy.mil/bupers-npc/support/uniforms/uniformregulations/Pages/default.aspx and each branch having tailored to them. Religions should play no part in the military when it comes to standards that are expected to be upheld for all. So in that case because I am Christian I feel that since Sunday is our rest day, that I should not have to be on duty or stand watch and that I get to go to church every Sunday even in battle.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Signal Support Systems Specialist
1
1
0
Edited >1 y ago
Just other. I see it like this:

If a woman can wear her hair long and it has to be put into a bun, Then the long hair should be no problem for any military member. It would be absolutely hysterical to see men in buns tho... LOL

There are a lot of soldiers that I saw that had no shaving profiles... This could fall into that.

The only thing I really might have an issue and it really isn't a great big one, is that he can't wear the SM hat. That he is only capable of wearing the turban. The only problem for me. EH
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO3 Mitchell Haynie
1
1
0
At the end of the day this is an issue of citizenship, not military code. As a citizen of the United States his right to freely express his religious preference and the exercise thereof is constitutionally protected. We all know that when we volunteered to serve we give up these rights as military personnel and chose to live under military regulations, code, law and justice. While he certainly has the right to exercise his faith, he has no right to subjugate, alter, change, adopt or otherwise subvert the military to suit his religious preference, and a federal judge should know better!
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

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

close