Beards and the US military: a religious liberty win for Sikh officer

  • Thread starter Thread starter CopyBoy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CopyBoy

Guest
Washington D.C., Dec 15, 2015 / 06:03 am (CNA/EWTN News).- A Sikh officer and a religious liberty group have welcomed the U.S. Army’s temporary religious exemption for the officer, who sees a conflict between military regulations against beards and his religious practice.
Click to expand...
“My Sikh faith and military service are two core parts of who I am,” Captain Simratpal Singh said Dec. 14. "I am proud to serve my country as an officer and I look forward to being able to continue serving without having to give up my religious beliefs.”
Click to expand...
patheos.com/blogs/catholicnews/2015/12/beards-and-the-us-military-a-religious-liberty-win-for-sikh-officer/
 
This is all well and good until the gas is in the air! Anyone with CBR(NBC) training understand this comment.
 
The_Wizard said:
This is all well and good until the gas is in the air! Anyone with CBR(NBC) training understand this comment.
Click to expand...
Mike Huckabee is spot on. The military is not a social experiment and these other “human rights” issues are irrelevant.
 
The_Wizard said:
This is all well and good until the gas is in the air! Anyone with CBR(NBC) training understand this comment.
Click to expand...
Depends on how you trim it…we wore breads of fairly great length in the Navy. As long as hair on throat and around jaws was edged, a Mark V or an OBA never had much of a problem getting a good seal.
 
Prodigal_40s said:
Mike Huckabee is spot on. The military is not a social experiment and these other “human rights” issues are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Anyone observing or serving in the US military, while they might agree that they don’t think it should be, but it always has been, ie racia, gender, sexual orientation integration.
 
Neofight said:
Anyone observing or serving in the US military, while they might agree that they don’t think it should be, but it always has been, ie racia, gender, sexual orientation integration.
Click to expand...
The military serves a function. Interference in it to “reflect values” is irresponsible. It requires genuine equality and “equality” which elevates any “right” above team coherence and the ability to conduct operations according to directives from command isn’t useful. It’s simple.
Once it gets complicated, it falls apart
 
I would go as far as saying that most guys in the army or airforce I know (who served recently, I know it was once different) eventually grow facial hair while overseas. If this guy is a good get for the army, why not let him keep the beard? They won’t care in a few months anyway.

Plus, we’ve already allowed this for chaplains, even those who serve in combat zones (Rabbis are what I have in mind). The beard cannot be that great an impediment to service.

Granted, I know at least one Sikh who’s currently serving, and he didn’t have facial hair going in, but I think he has grown a bit of a stache.

Anyway, Canada’s defense minister is a Sikh. He was super valuable to their army, and I think it would be a shame to have excluded a competent and valuable soldier because of his beard. Unnecessary loss.
 
I’m fine with either but in the military, you accept orders. It interrupts discipline and unit cohesiveness when cases like this come up
 
Neofight said:
Depends on how you trim it…we wore breads of fairly great length in the Navy. As long as hair on throat and around jaws was edged, a Mark V or an OBA never had much of a problem getting a good seal.
Click to expand...
It is not just his beard. Sikh also wear turbans which I think would be a bigger impediment to a proper seal then the beard. I had to get special glasses inserts for my MCU-2/P mask because the thin rubber straps securing the normal pair around my head made me fail the gas mask leak test.
 
Prodigal40s, no, it doesn’t. For the reasons discussed above. Plus, he asked for a special accommodation, which they granted. He didn’t refuse orders.
 
claymcdermott said:
Prodigal40s, no, it doesn’t. For the reasons discussed above. Plus, he asked for a special accommodation, which they granted. He didn’t refuse orders.
Click to expand...
Fair enough Clay. I have great admiration for the US military, some of the most professional and exceptional soldiers in the World but it turns my stomach at the way that Obama and John McCain have interfered with traditions and the composition of the very order of command with social experimentation.
I have less respect for US politicians, especially in the last 10 years. Oh and Weinstein for his Christian prejudice but I’m not alone in that
 
claymcdermott said:
I would go as far as saying that most guys in the army or airforce I know (who served recently, I know it was once different) eventually grow facial hair while overseas. If this guy is a good get for the army, why not let him keep the beard? They won’t care in a few months anyway.

Plus, we’ve already allowed this for chaplains, even those who serve in combat zones (Rabbis are what I have in mind). The beard cannot be that great an impediment to service.

Granted, I know at least one Sikh who’s currently serving, and he didn’t have facial hair going in, but I think he has grown a bit of a stache.

Anyway, Canada’s defense minister is a Sikh. He was super valuable to their army, and I think it would be a shame to have excluded a competent and valuable soldier because of his beard. Unnecessary loss.
Click to expand...
I remember having soldiers that would go to sick call for razor bumps, and not have to shave. If that’s what he needs to fulfill a religious obligation, then let it be. If he’s enlisted in the U.S. military, he is still covered by the same Constitution he took an Oath to protect.
But, I will say, the famous stache of Hitler came about as his long stache would interfere with the seal of his gas mask. So, hence the Dash Stache.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top