Posted on Mar 24, 2017
Why Are Only Three Observant Sikh Men Serving In The U.S. Military?
7.4K
88
29
9
9
0
"What I'm anticipating with this decision is that we will have a move in this country to recognize the right of individuals from different religious backgrounds to live in an America that does not discriminate against them on the basis of how they appear," says Simran Jeet Singh, the senior religion fellow for the Sikh Coalition.
As a general rule, the Department of Defense prohibits facial hair and the wearing of religious headgear among service members, though it offers "accommodation" on a case-by-case basis in recognition of "sincerely held beliefs."
Your thoughts?
@SN Greg Wright @SP5 Mark Kuzinski COL Mikel J. Burroughs SFC William Farrell PVT James Strait GySgt Melissa Gravila MSgt George Cater SFC George Smith Maj Marty Hogan Capt Jeff S. Capt Seid Waddell PO3 Donald Murphy CPL Crystal Pettway, MBA Sgt Kelli Mays CPT Gabe Snell SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint Cpl Mark A. Morris CSM Charles Hayden LTC Trent Klug ] SGT (Join to see)
As a general rule, the Department of Defense prohibits facial hair and the wearing of religious headgear among service members, though it offers "accommodation" on a case-by-case basis in recognition of "sincerely held beliefs."
Your thoughts?
@SN Greg Wright @SP5 Mark Kuzinski COL Mikel J. Burroughs SFC William Farrell PVT James Strait GySgt Melissa Gravila MSgt George Cater SFC George Smith Maj Marty Hogan Capt Jeff S. Capt Seid Waddell PO3 Donald Murphy CPL Crystal Pettway, MBA Sgt Kelli Mays CPT Gabe Snell SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint Cpl Mark A. Morris CSM Charles Hayden LTC Trent Klug ] SGT (Join to see)
Why Are Only Three Observant Sikh Men Serving In The U.S. Military?
Posted from npr.org
Uniforms
Regulation
Law
Rights
Culture
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 11
9
9
0
Nothing against Sikhs, but uniformity and discipline are being watered down with these exceptions.
What next?
What next?
(9)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Capt Seid Waddell - So long as it doesn't detract from mission readiness (specifically), obviously a Turban would not work as a Kevlar replacement in wartime. Too many of our standards are only our standards because they are our standards. Good order and discipline are used as the rational, or excuse assuming that if the Army allowed beards in non-chemically hostile areas we'd create a long list of behavior problems. The standards need to be tied to actual performance, not perceived but actual performance. I'd need to look deeper into their religious clothing rules.
(1)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
MAJ (Join to see), back in the day the attention to detail was a training method for following orders to the letter, and not questioning or arguing every little personal point.
Unit cohesion depends upon everyone putting the mission ahead of every other consideration and working only for the common goal, not marching to their individual personal drummer.
Once you start making exceptions for one the rest start questioning their orders too - is that what you recommend?
Unit cohesion depends upon everyone putting the mission ahead of every other consideration and working only for the common goal, not marching to their individual personal drummer.
Once you start making exceptions for one the rest start questioning their orders too - is that what you recommend?
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Only give out orders that should be followed, if there is no beard regulation at garrison the issue becomes mute. Good example is my 1SG's uniform policy in Iraq. Everyone needed the exact same loadout on their IBA to ensure uniformity and understanding of where everything is, so you can grab any individuals first aid kit without having to look for it. But a 249 gunner and a M16 gunner shouldn't have similar ammunition loadout on their IBA... His solution have the 249 gunners wear their 7 magazines like everyone else and put their saw rounds in their rucksack. How stupid can you be, uniformity has a point but can be taken to the ridiculous extreme. There should be no uniformity between ammunition of 249 gunners and riflemen or grenadiers for that matter. Likewise there should be very little uniformity when it comes to immaterial religious matters, it doesn't affect me at all if one person in the formation has a different headgear on, but we have been trained that it should. I think that is a problem.
(1)
(0)
8
8
0
Maybe only three want to serve. Maybe those three are the only ones who stuck through the entire process to be allowed to serve and still maintain the Sikh standard. Maybe 97 other Sikh's applied but didn't want to stick through the entire process.
(8)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
They needed to violate their religion in order to join, at least until a few years ago. I see no reason why freedom of religion should not apply to a beard in garrison.
(3)
(0)
1SG Mike Case
I completely agree, but even if they allow beards, doesn't mean that all the Sikhs will join. The inference is that since exceptions have to be made to join, that Sikh's are not joining by the thousands. Who knows if the beard is allowed if they will then join or not. I am all for letting them in and not having them to jump through the hoops to get in. I believe they are dentists and doctors, so lets be honest, if they are saving lives, then I could care less about their beard, but the title is misleading as it tries to imply that thousands are wanting to join but the whole beard thing is stopping them.
(2)
(0)
5
5
0
Funny how before "PC" crept into our vocabulary and society that this would have been a non-issue and NON-negotiable subject!! The military has become a giant 'social experimental ground' for all the deviant liberal lawmakers and I for one say it is time to STOP!!! While I understand America is one of the most progressive societies (this WILL be our ultimate downfall), the military is NOT the place to start allowing everything under the sun. Look at how idiotic we must look to other countries and here is a prime example... Manning is in prison for Treason, yet the military has 'allowed' 'it' (because he/she doesn't know what the hell sex 'it' is) to go through the process of changing 'its' sex and the most insulting thing to the American people is it is being done with OUR taxpayer monies!!!
Enough is enough people, the way we are headed, the next large-scale conflict WILL destroy us unless we turn things around and that starts with NOT making all of these 'little exceptions' at every turn. The military is the ONLY government run entity that runs efficiently (until Congress sticks their dumbass noses in with crap like this) and will cease to exist unless those in it adhere to decades of tradition and rules.
My last comment is that EVERYONE in Congress NEEDS to be FIRED and REPLACED!
Enough is enough people, the way we are headed, the next large-scale conflict WILL destroy us unless we turn things around and that starts with NOT making all of these 'little exceptions' at every turn. The military is the ONLY government run entity that runs efficiently (until Congress sticks their dumbass noses in with crap like this) and will cease to exist unless those in it adhere to decades of tradition and rules.
My last comment is that EVERYONE in Congress NEEDS to be FIRED and REPLACED!
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google