Posted on Jun 16, 2015
MAJ Senior Observer   Controller/Trainer
280K
1.82K
759
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: 278
TSgt Steven Van Dyken
0
0
0
This is ridiculous. Almost every individual in the military has given up something important to them in order to assimilate. The military has no desire to keep this individual from practicing his faith, but why can't he do that while confirming to military standards? The regulations are in place for a reason, and everyone must have the same standard.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Frank Rinchich
0
0
0
This is BS, we are giving our country away bit by bit might as well give the military away also. When I was active we had our religious faith stamped on our dog tag, that's enough religious freedom in the military. We are a fighting , killing machine. not there to save souls.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Sgt Frank Rinchich
Sgt Frank Rinchich
>1 y
The court went to far, if it stays in the ROTC I could go for it but . the courts has no business making rules for our military , leave that up to our military leaders that know best. Our tradition has been a clean look sharp military, need to keep it that way. Our country is run now by political correctness , now the WH wants to start on our military. as I said in my last post on this , it's BS. give in to the minority and political correctness.
and we will end up like the military of a few countries that turn tail and run. The Sikh may be great fighters , and we would be proud to have them in our military. but if they want to be part of a US military rather then their own then they have to be willing to follow our rules and regulations.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Human Resources Specialist
0
0
0
2b7859c0
And yet this is still banned
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Human Resources Specialist
0
0
0
I think they blended the rules a lot on this one many people have religious believes that say they should be able to wear dreds and that's still band to this day
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Ward Taber
0
0
0
I have no problem with him being part of the military but he should be held to the SAME standards and dress codes as everyone else.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt W Hibshman
0
0
0
The Sikh student is asking to be allowed to participate in an Officer Candidate program which would prepare him to "possibly" be commissioned. ROTC members are not active duty; merely candidates. If there are other Sikh serving on active duty, then the Armed Forces have already vetted the issue and this decision must pertain specifically to the ROTC. An example of the dragon outrunning its' tail.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Sgt W Hibshman
Sgt W Hibshman
>1 y
Personally, I believe the uniform should be wore strictly by the Uniform Code no exceptions. If someone wishes to serve then they should be willing to set aside their religious requirement while in uniform. If their religion does not permit that then they may choose to serve this nation in a civilian capacity. But, that is only an opinion. Obviously, the military leadership does not agree.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar
CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar
>1 y
The taxpayer is paying for the ROTC. It is waste of funds to pay for someone who "may" be commissioned who clearly is not a team player.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Sgt W Hibshman
Sgt W Hibshman
>1 y
229f6f7a
That is true it is a waste of money. But, apparently the armed services have already decided the issue. There currently are several Sikh adherents in the US Army. I guess I'm confused why ROTC would have a stricter standard than active duty.
(1)
Reply
(0)
MAJ David White
MAJ David White
>1 y
my first encounter with a Sikh in uniform was in 1998 when I met a radiologist in the base hospital wearing a turban. I heard that he knew his field, though and that covered the medical end of it. I wondered about the turban vis-à-vis donning a promask, as he also had a beard.... I've raised that issue before and folks have vouched that they've seen Sikhs "don and clear" within the standard. Good evidence can/did convince me he can serve. AS he serves, and others of his faith, we all can see that they "buy in" to the whole democracy/republic concept. I'm happy with that.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Pedro Meza
0
0
0
Capt Jeff Schwager, the courts and presidents have been setting military policy since our beginning, otherwise us white Christian men do not change; sad to say we have to be forced to adapt for the better.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
Capt Jeff S.
>1 y
Let me guess... That wasn't a racist comment.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
CPT Pedro Meza
>1 y
Capt Jeff Schwager, it is not racist when it is true and said by a white dude. Time to be honest and address our fears of change and adaption.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
Capt Jeff S.
>1 y
Did you mean "fears of change and adaptation"? No, I'm not afraid of change. I would welcome positiive change... like as in:
* people not playing the race card every time they feel challenged by circumstance.
* people accepting responsibility for their actions instead of blaming others for everything wrong that happens in their lives... Maybe it's time to do a little introspecting.
* a return to the vision for this country that our Founding Fathers had -- where all men are created equal. Equal as in equal at the starting line, not the finish line. Like it or not, we are not all the same in terms of our abilities, but we are the same in terms of our worth. We should not expect others to provide for those who, by the choices they make, refuse to provide for themselves... or who, by their actions, force themselves into a state of dependency on others.
* the government spending less than it takes in so that it can pay down the national debt.

Don't know about you, but I don't want to see this country go down the tubes... And in case you hadn't noticed, our obsession with political correctness isn't working out so well...
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
CPT Pedro Meza
>1 y
Capt Jeff Schwager our founders set a system of progressive change, the courts and president made laws for Blacks, Women and Now Gay, Lesbians and others to serve all have been for the better. Facts!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CW3 Susan Burkholder
0
0
0
It is incredibly unfair to Christians. I could never wear a cross necklace when I was in the service. Why is it ok for a Sikh to display his religion visibly in uniform and Christians can not?
(0)
Comment
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
I'm not sure why you believe I'm an atheist because I'm quoting the bible. Perhaps you and I just have different interpretations of "Love thy neighbor as thyself".
(0)
Reply
(0)
PFC Chris Hemingway
PFC Chris Hemingway
>1 y
Cw3 it is customary to tell a person y you voted them down like I explained why I voted you down
(0)
Reply
(0)
PFC Chris Hemingway
PFC Chris Hemingway
>1 y
Did you vote me down because you believe I'm a satan worshipper even though I don't believe in satan or because I insulted your fragile psyche pls tell me.
(0)
Reply
(0)
PFC Chris Hemingway
PFC Chris Hemingway
>1 y
And what do you mean unfair to Christians at least the chaplain corps can help you with your religion they won't even allow a priest or priestess of mine in the corps because we don't have a set religious text
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CPL Bryan Claeys
0
0
0
I am not against infringing upon constitutional rights by any means but when you're a service member you forfeit certain rights when you sign your contract. You can't speak out publicly against the commander in chief etc. So either adhere to all of the AR's or don't join. Point blank period.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
Does that include the AR that governs religious accommodations?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Erik Spike Thiesmeyer, Sr.
0
0
0
These accommodations (wearing a turban and having facial hair) are not compatible with military service. Period. He cannot properly wear headgear, either the uniform caps, or any protective helmet. How would he drive a tank, fly a helicopter, or shoot his weapon on the rifle range? With a beard, his gas mask would NEVER fit correctly.

No, I'm sorry but he is welcome to worship where he wants, but he cannot have these obvious safety violations.
(0)
Comment
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
CPT Pedro Meza
>1 y
CW2 Erik Thiesmeyer, I have seen Sikhs in the ARMY since 1974, and some of us do wear beards out the wire, I got lots of pictures that prove that, In fact Mr. Rumsfeld was mad.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Lt Col Instructor Navigator
Lt Col (Join to see)
>1 y
So all the SOF guys should be required to shave at all times as well, right?
(0)
Reply
(0)
LTC Erik Spike Thiesmeyer, Sr.
LTC Erik Spike Thiesmeyer, Sr.
>1 y
The OPTEMPO and requirements of elite units operating on the battlefield are completely different than the uniform standards for the other 99% of military personnel. I too have seen serving Sikhs serving in uniform. One in particular was the never taken seriously and could not deploy because of his religious accommodations. He wore an enormous black turban that couldn't possible fit in an ACH, much less a patrol cap. He simply affixed a flash and his rank to it (also a violation). Soldiers would laugh when he entered a room, thinking it was a joke. He had to be assigned to the CG's staff. What kind of a message does that send? Besides, my point was about SAFETY. If SOF personnel were in an NBC battle space, they'd shave their beards, duh!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

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

close