Posted on 11/14/2014 8:37:31 AM PST by PROCON
(CNN) -- A Sikh student at Hofstra University filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the United States Army, claiming the service refused to grant him a religious accommodation that would allow him to enlist in his school's ROTC program without shaving his beard, cutting his hair and removing his turban, according to court documents.
When Iknoor Singh requested a religious exemption from the military's grooming policies to enlist as an ROTC cadet in April 2013, his request was first denied on the grounds that his noncompliance would have "an adverse impact on the Army's readiness, unit cohesion, standards, health, safety, or discipline," court documents said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Isn't diversity wonderful? </sarc>
Ask him if he carries his Kirpan to class.
I believe that if you want to join the military, you conform to their standards, not the other way around.
Just a small example of why for any nation to survive, it must have a commonly accepted culture.
Anyone remember the term “melting pot.” Long gone.
I have found Sikhs to be wonderful people but military service does require conformity.
At what point does religion move from being the belief in certain things to the practice of certain things?
As a Christian, I believe in Jesus and eat tuna salad every Sunday at the covered dish luncheon. Because that is part of my Christianity. Yes? No?
To what extent does the state tell the Sikh or Christian that his beard and tuna salad are, in the judgment of the state, cultural practices and not religious practices?
He should just tell them he is gay, then anything is ok.
Doesn’t matter If it’s religious practice or cultural practice or whim. Non-compliance with regulation is non-compliance.
To what extent? Up to what point? Growing a beard? Making the sign of the cross? Praying on one's knees? Praying while standing up? Quoting the Bible? Writing about the Bible? Discussing the Bible? Reading a Bible?
How does the state decide? Where does the state draw the line, and how does go about deciding where to draw the line?
awwwwwwwwww, poor baby!
First, if he wishes to join the military, why not to ENGLAAND, where the sikhs are a part of their heritage!
Second, here in America, EVERYBODY goes through basic training with no hair, no beard, and no confounded doo-dads.
Beards get in the way of the best health of the soldier.
Now, what other matter in the doctrine of waging war will be offensive to Sikhs? Can he be asked to burn barrels of poop as one of the tasks he is to perform? Or work in Graves Registration?
Doesn’t matter If it’s religious practice or cultural practice or whim. Non-compliance with regulation is non-compliance.
Yep, he really doesn’t understand how the army works.
Paul Harvey called it a “Pressure Cooker”.
Sikh, not exactly a world dominating culture. We can do without them.
I don’t remember joining the Army as being enumerated as a constitutionally protected right. They discriminate against fat people, people who do badly on the ASVAB, people with some pretty random medical conditions... I knew a guy who couldn’t get in because he was born with only one ear. They were OK with him being deaf in one ear but insisted he had to have two ears.
On the other hand Sikh’s have served with distinction in the British Army for a very long time and they have always worn turbans while doing it. If there is anything in their religion that precludes their being loyal to the United States, as there is in Islam, they should not be allowed in the armed forces anyway, but I’m not aware of anything like that.
How does the state decide? Where does the state draw the line, and how does go about deciding where to draw the line?
The army is a very tight hierarchy, unlike the free world of the private sector. Thing is, ALL rules are arbitrary in some way. e.g. the same who, how and why questions could apply to displaying uncovered hustler magazines at the grocery store checkout stand. The thing is, at the end of the day someone IN AUTHORITY really does get to decide. Even more so in the military.
The arguments you make have real validity. I’ve made them myself. But I won’t fall into the trap of PC situational ethics. As far as I’m conserned, this guy is the equivalent of a Nazi trying to join the U.S. army in 1942. Those in authority are there for a reason. They have the education and experience to know that it would be a really stupid thing to do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.