Posted on Jun 17, 2015
Should we allow Individuality in Uniform, in the name of Religion?
3.79K
10
7
First of all, I know this is not a first or a new topic. But, I am interested in seeing if I am out of touch, or not...
- Yes, I know we make provisions for religious items (AR 600-20 Para 5-6), garments, as well as other areas too. Heck, over 25 years ago, I saw an SF Sergeant First Class, in uniform, with a Green Turban, flash, and crest. So, again, I know this is not a new topic. This is what the AR (currently says - excerpt):
(g) Religious headgear may be worn while in uniform if the headgear meets the following criteria:
1. The religious headgear is subdued in color (generally black, brown, green, dark or Navy blue, or a combination of these colors).
2. The religious headgear is of a style and size that can be completely covered by standard military headgear.
3. The religious headgear bears no writing, symbols, or pictures.
4. Wear of the religious headgear does not interfere with the wear or proper functioning of protective clothing or equipment.
5. Religious headgear that meets these criteria is authorized irrespective of the faith group from which it originates.
6. Religious headgear will not be worn in place of military headgear under circumstances when the wear of military headgear is required (for example, when the Soldier is outside or required to wear headgear indoors for a special
purpose).
(5) Grooming practices. The Army’s grooming standards are contained in AR 670–1. Religious-based exceptions to policy previously given Soldiers under the provisions of this regulation prior to 1 January 1986 continue in effect as long as the affected Soldiers remain otherwise qualified for retention. However, Soldiers previously granted authority to wear unshorn hair, unshorn beard, or permanent religious jewelry prior to 1 January 1986 will not be assigned PCS or TDY out of CONUS due to health and safety considerations.
- That said, I also believe being a Soldier (Sailor, Airmen, Marine) is about assimilating, surrendering some of your individuality and individual freedoms, and becoming part of the team. As a leader, our number one job is to model the standard, and what right looks like. I am not sure how you can lead, if you expect to have a different standard for you... Again, that is from my lens.
- While I value individual freedom, liberty, and choice, I also believe the standards of the organization come before your personal preferences. I also believe in the volunteer military, and that if you don't like the rules and regulations, you can find another place to make your mark.
- So, what do you think?
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/06/16/sikh-student-wins-rotc-ruling-can-keep-beard-turban/28800587/
AR 600-20 - Paragraph 5–6. Accommodating religious practices
http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_20.pdf
- Yes, I know we make provisions for religious items (AR 600-20 Para 5-6), garments, as well as other areas too. Heck, over 25 years ago, I saw an SF Sergeant First Class, in uniform, with a Green Turban, flash, and crest. So, again, I know this is not a new topic. This is what the AR (currently says - excerpt):
(g) Religious headgear may be worn while in uniform if the headgear meets the following criteria:
1. The religious headgear is subdued in color (generally black, brown, green, dark or Navy blue, or a combination of these colors).
2. The religious headgear is of a style and size that can be completely covered by standard military headgear.
3. The religious headgear bears no writing, symbols, or pictures.
4. Wear of the religious headgear does not interfere with the wear or proper functioning of protective clothing or equipment.
5. Religious headgear that meets these criteria is authorized irrespective of the faith group from which it originates.
6. Religious headgear will not be worn in place of military headgear under circumstances when the wear of military headgear is required (for example, when the Soldier is outside or required to wear headgear indoors for a special
purpose).
(5) Grooming practices. The Army’s grooming standards are contained in AR 670–1. Religious-based exceptions to policy previously given Soldiers under the provisions of this regulation prior to 1 January 1986 continue in effect as long as the affected Soldiers remain otherwise qualified for retention. However, Soldiers previously granted authority to wear unshorn hair, unshorn beard, or permanent religious jewelry prior to 1 January 1986 will not be assigned PCS or TDY out of CONUS due to health and safety considerations.
- That said, I also believe being a Soldier (Sailor, Airmen, Marine) is about assimilating, surrendering some of your individuality and individual freedoms, and becoming part of the team. As a leader, our number one job is to model the standard, and what right looks like. I am not sure how you can lead, if you expect to have a different standard for you... Again, that is from my lens.
- While I value individual freedom, liberty, and choice, I also believe the standards of the organization come before your personal preferences. I also believe in the volunteer military, and that if you don't like the rules and regulations, you can find another place to make your mark.
- So, what do you think?
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/06/16/sikh-student-wins-rotc-ruling-can-keep-beard-turban/28800587/
AR 600-20 - Paragraph 5–6. Accommodating religious practices
http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_20.pdf
ROTC
Religion
EO
Standards
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
This is a duplicate discussion. Click below to see more on this topic.
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
Responses: 5
If they don't want to wear the uniform like everyone else, they shouldn't join. The uniform is a requirement of the job.
COL Charles Williams I have to agree with your assessment. If individuals with religious preferences and practices want to be a part of our uniformed services, then they should conform to the regulations set in place. The problem with today's society we are trying so hard to please every religious group and compromise on every issue that comes up in the public. I think a lot of this is a distractor from what the real purpose of our armed forces represent. This is just my opinion and I'm sure there are others that are for and against!
In my simpleton mind, it boils down to this:
Either you forgo your religion to join the military or you uphold your religious morals and DON'T JOIN the military. You can't have it both ways!
Either you forgo your religion to join the military or you uphold your religious morals and DON'T JOIN the military. You can't have it both ways!
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google