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 will say that the court went too far. So now every single person who has a religious, sexual, or other type of need will be given their preferences?
This is not conducive to good order and discipline because your saying that if you have a proven difference you can behave according to your preferences rather than the rules and regulations of the service.
While I do respect everyone's personal ideologies, they also have to respect military rules and regulations if they desire to serve.
This is not conducive to good order and discipline because your saying that if you have a proven difference you can behave according to your preferences rather than the rules and regulations of the service.
While I do respect everyone's personal ideologies, they also have to respect military rules and regulations if they desire to serve.
(1)
(0)
The best way in my opinion to settle most of if not all these issues is to keep sending "these people" to the chamber so they understand why we have rules in place. You can't properly seal a mask with a beard.
(1)
(0)
Maj Mike Sciales
And if that becomes a real concern I'll bet you a dollar they'll shave, in the meanwhile they harm nothing except individual notions of grooming regs.
(1)
(0)
PO1 Glenn Boucher
With all due respect the ability to seal a gas mask with a beard is a weak argument. For many years previously military members had beards, and successfully participated in fire fighting while wearing the old OBA, even our Special Forces wear full beards during operations and deployments, its not like they are shaving quickly if they have to don a gas mask.
In my opinion its just plain wrong for a civilian judge to rule on this because the military is unique and we have to maintain good order and discipline.
And yes I do know that there are many allowances for someone to wear their religious devices and stay within regulations.
Personally I find it odd that a beard would define your religious beliefs. Just my opinion though.
In my opinion its just plain wrong for a civilian judge to rule on this because the military is unique and we have to maintain good order and discipline.
And yes I do know that there are many allowances for someone to wear their religious devices and stay within regulations.
Personally I find it odd that a beard would define your religious beliefs. Just my opinion though.
(3)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
PO1 Glenn Boucher - There are a lot of religious beliefs I find odd...but that doesn't mean I'm going to prevent someone from having them.
(0)
(0)
The first Amendment protects the right of the individual to practice their religion. However in the military community the rights of the individual are second to the fundamental requirement for obedience and discipline. This is the concept that the "needs of service" are greater than the "desires and interests of the individual". The Department of Defense already has a Religious Accommodations Policy and the short answer given those guidelines is that, "A request for religious accommodations should be approved unless it interferes with the mission." Regulations: Directive 1300.17, February 10, 2009.
![](https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/link_data_pictures/images/000/016/142/qrc/army-sikh-palace_3209592k.jpg?1443045386)
British Army examines plans to create a Sikh regiment
Armed Forces minister Mark Francois says unit would inherit many of the 'proud traditions of Sikh regiments' from the Army's past
(1)
(0)
Now what worries me most is that a court said what would impact military readiness. He should of went threw the normal waver process and left it in normal channels or conformed to army standards. The courts are not in a position to determine military readiness and military standards.
(1)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
He tried to go the normal process, but ROTC leadership fought him...despite the fact that active duty Sikhs are already serving with the same accommodations that this student was requesting. I think the fault lies with ROTC leadership for not adopting the same stance as Army leadership.
(0)
(0)
As a service member he needs to follow the dress code that is set by the military.
With him getting by with his uniform changes why the hell can't other troops
change there uniform to what they say is there religion.
I am sorry he needs to wear the uniform correctly or find another way to serve
our great nation. This could open a whole lot shit thats not needed at this time.
With him getting by with his uniform changes why the hell can't other troops
change there uniform to what they say is there religion.
I am sorry he needs to wear the uniform correctly or find another way to serve
our great nation. This could open a whole lot shit thats not needed at this time.
(1)
(0)
No. You conform to the military, the military doesn't conform to you. If he wishes to serve the country that he loves, there are other avenues. Ones that don't compromise the integrity of the whole for the needs of the few.
(1)
(0)
If the perception is that you a party to a privileged group then the current political environment is against you. If you are a party to a group that is considered less fortunate then the courts will rule on your side; this being despite the fact that some minority religions are anti gay, anti women, and do not tolerate other religions.
American soldiers once wore beards, this stopped in WWI when chemical warfare became an issue; one cannot get a proper seal on a gas mask with a beard. Should others have to put their lives at risk while some one is doing the dying cock roach after a dose of VX agent?
Soldiers of that area also shaved their heads and beards to control fleas which were a major problem in trench warfare. I was told in a history class that even after WWII that the old WWI trenches were still infested with fleas.
American soldiers once wore beards, this stopped in WWI when chemical warfare became an issue; one cannot get a proper seal on a gas mask with a beard. Should others have to put their lives at risk while some one is doing the dying cock roach after a dose of VX agent?
Soldiers of that area also shaved their heads and beards to control fleas which were a major problem in trench warfare. I was told in a history class that even after WWII that the old WWI trenches were still infested with fleas.
(1)
(0)
SSG Donald Mceuen
I guess when he gose down you let him die so he can go to his higher power
with his head wrap. I have faith in my beard but i shaved it off when i went in
and grew it back when i got out. I am sorry but no higher power is going to
send you to the bad place for not having a beard and wearing a head dress.
So all-n-all he needs to comply or stand down...
with his head wrap. I have faith in my beard but i shaved it off when i went in
and grew it back when i got out. I am sorry but no higher power is going to
send you to the bad place for not having a beard and wearing a head dress.
So all-n-all he needs to comply or stand down...
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
That's what sets apart a nation of laws from mob rule...the law sticks up for people who are less fortunate.
(1)
(0)
Personally I find this court ruling to be complete garbage. You enlist and agree to be bound by all military regulations like AR 670-1. They would not cave to Christian religious norms, so why is this different? This is another prime example of our legal system under the current administration selectively choosing what to enforce according to the political climate.
(1)
(0)
The military today (all services) is completely lost with customs, courtesy, and discipline. The idea is for everyone to be the same and not one individual or individuals stand out. You train to fight not pray. Give the soldiers of today to us old guys and we will show them what it's like to be in the real military of old. If you wouldn't mind keep the brown nosing politicians in Washington, D.C. while we put the military back together for you. Once were done don't let them slip back to the military they are today. With all these religious favors you do for the soldier of today it is a wonder they get anything done!!
(1)
(0)
Regs are regs I say. But then again, I'm not a federal court judge. If you want something bad enough enough you typically conform to the rules and laws that are in place to become what ever it is you want to be. This sue over every little thing that hurts your little girl feelings is ridiculous. But then again, the military has always made religious accommodations, it's just that no one really challenged the rules. I remember a full blooded Cherokee telling us all that if he really wanted to force the issue he could have his hair long if he wanted to because it was part of his religion. He didn't push the issue because he didn't follow his religion to the letter of his religious beliefs.
(1)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
Well, since the Army has been allowing other Sikhs to serve (again) since 2010, I'm not sure why this ROTC detachment felt the need to disregard the regs on religious accommodations.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next