Skip to comments.Sikhs challenge US Army's ban on turbans, beards
Posted on 06/14/2009 8:57:35 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
NEW YORK -- Military service is in Capt. Kamaljit Singh Kalsi's blood. But his plans to go on active duty in July are now on hold. An Army policy from the 1980s that regulates the wearing of religious items would mean he would need to shave his beard and remove the turban he wears in accordance with his religious precepts.
Sikhs have a long history with the U.S. military, serving in World Wars I and II, the Korean and Vietnam wars, and in the Persian Gulf.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
how many precisely, I have no quibble with Sikhs really but rules are rules...esp in the military
US Army shooting itself in the foot. Sikhs have served with honor defending this country in the past and the Brits seeing how fearsome warriors they make had no problem with their turbans and facial head serving King/Queen and country.
Easy, Kevlar turbans. Will stimulate some additional growth in the armor sector.
The Army can solve this by creating a special unit of Sikhs, thus allowing them to wear their turnans, keep their facial hair, etc.
The uniform is what it is. There are no turbans. You cannot have a beard because your protective gas mask will not seal properly with one. Like it or not, there are good reasons for the rules.
Regulations on facial hair and scalp hair length date from WW I and have nothing to do with prohibitions on religious items. They have to do with ensuring that gas masks make a seal with the skin around the nose and mouth in the matter of the former and in giving lice fewer places to hang out in the latter.
The only thing you get to publically demonstrate in the wearing of the uniform, is that you are an American. This mans head isn’t in the right place.
Sikhs have a long history with the U.S. military,
Ok, then why can’t the modern day ones respect the fact that their predecessors accepted this policy.
Why, we have one military. Why not have one all white or black or women - that is not a solution.
This debate pops up about every ten years. In the past there have been some minor accommodations... very short beards and small turbans. Then the question of where they carry the little curved knife.
Where does it stop? Skullcaps? Those hasidic mutton chops? Cowboy hats? England did it as a way to reinforce to colonial troops that they were most assuredly not British. It wasnt that England was culturally sensitive. They were well aware that if they wore the standard British Army uniform, they would feel equal.
This guy needs to hold being “American” above being a Sihk.
Did you have any problems with all black units during WWII?
Other examples can be readily utilized, as well.
Accordingly, there is no “solution” other than to follow Army regulations.
If you join an organization that wears a UNIFORM by choice, then you wear the uniform... SIMPLE!
LOL...yeah, OK, well I'd take my chances, regardless. This guy's a turd. Drop him in the toilet and move on. Screw 'im. The Army doesn't need Captains this bad.
True. . but they shaved, cut their hair and didn’t wear the diaper on their head.
Then, of course, equal protection and all that, muslims would be able to serve while wearing their long craggy dirty beard as well.
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.