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
SSG Martin Reyna
0
0
0
Policy is Policy. If deployed and attacked with a gas, how will he seal his gas mask? Will the army be to blame for not providing the proper gear?
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SN Greg Wright
0
0
0
For what it's worth, I don't think this guy ever makes it to active duty, and if he does, he'll have to conform. Being an ROTC cadet isn't the same thing as being in a firefight -- how's he gonna wear his helmet, etc...

PC crap has gone too far, however. The only religious accommodation that should be made *to the uniforms!* are the insignia of chaplains. Period.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Michael Fullmer
0
0
0
EVERYONE is expected to give up SOME freedom upon enlisting. This individual is not being restricted from practicing his religious beliefs, he is simply being asked to do it without a beard or turban. In my unqualified opinion, I believe the judge went to far and I hope it, if appealed, will be overturned.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Lew Dunham
0
0
0
shouldn't that be written "too far?"
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Anne Miller
0
0
0
I believe for his intended MOS, this was a good call.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Suraj Dave
0
0
0
Edited >1 y ago
So you're telling me, if a soldier gets "Sikh" on his dogtag's, he can get away with not shaving and getting haircuts? If I was still in, I would jump on this folks. Those weekly haircuts add up and get expensive after a while.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
You do have to learn to wrap a turban, though.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
A1C Ken Tiedeman
0
0
0
Also sets a precedent re: the 1st Amendment "The Congress shall enact no law regarding the establishment of a religion..." I also agree with the second comment. If Christians and Jews are not going to be allowed to express their religious affiliations with a Cross or Star Of David, members of other faiiths should not ballowed to express theirs similarly.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Jorge Schulz
0
0
0
I do not see it as an issue, when the sun never set on the British empire many of the colonies that were loyal to the flag and country served as specialized units and did a dam good job when it came to fighting for the nation. As long we support the American believes in freedom and our goals as a nation and these individuals are willing to protect that from foreign and domestic I do not see an issue. If this individual was trying to convert everyone into his religion by coercion or force then yes I see a problem. If this fella serves honorably more power to him.
(0)
Comment
(0)
LCpl Todd Houston
LCpl Todd Houston
>1 y
Really?? You are using the British military as an example? WE BEAT THEM TWICE, REMEMBER??? Go watch Zooloo again and get back with me.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Regina Osirus
0
0
0
This case speaks very loud of where America is as a Country.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Leon Sikes
0
0
0
well, just another show of how stupid our officials are getting in this political correctness. if one person is allowed then it should be good for all. why do u need uniform then,I'm sure someone will come along and say it against their religious freedom to wear uniform. i don't think the USA is going to have much of a future. it once was a great nation but it slowly falling to shit.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

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

close