Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/01/pentagon-eases-rules-on-religious-garb-in-uniform/

Social engineering indeed. At least it should make the annual CS chamber fam training a lot more interesting. Watching the guys with beards try to get a good seal on the FPM will make for some hilarious videos.

If this is implemented I'm applying for a waiver so that by the time I retire I can do so with a J.E.B. Stuart beard or at least an Adelbert Ames goatee and mustache.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/photos-the-best-facial-hair-in-the-civil-war-47110028/?page=6

On one hand, Sikhs are generally pretty bad@$$, so they have that going for them.

But on the other, why in Hades would you join the military if you knew their dress codes did not comport with your religious beliefs?

quote:

---

Sikhs are generally pretty bad@$$

---

This is very true. The British/Indian armies had Sikh regiments that were supposed to be really tough and disciplined soldiers. If India had given them better weapons when the Chinese invaded, India might not have lost so much land.

quote:

---

why in Hades would you join the military if you knew their dress codes did not comport with your religious beliefs?

---

Maybe you want to help defend the country and constitution that has given you the freedom of religion?

From the instruction.

f. Requests for accommodation of religious practices will be resolved as follows:

(1) Immediate commanders may resolve requests for accommodation of religious
practices that do not require a waiver of Military Department or Service policies regarding the
wearing of military uniforms, the wearing of religious apparel, or Service grooming,
appearance, or body art standards.

(a) Jewelry bearing religious inscriptions or otherwise indicating affiliation or belief
is subject to existing Service uniform regulations under the same standard that applies to jewelry
that is not of a religious nature.

(b) Grooming and appearance practices are not included within the definition of
religious apparel; however, such practices are subject to consideration for accommodation when
the request is based on religious beliefs.

quote:

---

But on the other, why in Hades would you join the military if you knew their dress codes did not comport with your religious beliefs?

---

I think appropriately answered by big truck.

As soon as I go ashore, I don't shave until sometimes I'm back across the brow. I didn't join because I love being clean shaven and I bet Jesus wore a beard.

lots of fat worthless people want to serve also, as well as the physically and mentally handicapped. does't mean they should be allowed, and they aren't. remember, you are joining the military, not the military joining you. whats next, a Muslim company commander using sharia law instead of UCMJ at the next Art-15 because he is muslim?

Good order and discipline can be balanced with respect to religious beliefs. Operational effectiveness must trump religious beliefs. The instruction makes all this clear.

What clarythedrill said. I remember a few Sihks in the Army back in the '70's with the turban/beard thing. Similar to the guys with shaving profiles. Bad idea then, bad idea now. It ain't Burger King.

The repeal of DADT and the movement to place women in combat arms previously demonstrated that our current civilian leadership places political statements above military readiness. Shaving is more about hygiene and good order & discipline than the mask seal these days, but a military uniform isn't designed for personal uniqueness. You don't need a religious item/hair style to demonstrate your beliefs.

I've spent a little bit of time in India during the past 2 years. It's interesting. They're quite content to let the Sikhs be the only fighters. The military is mystery to most Indians. If you've never seen a 6'2" to 6'4" well built Sikh guy, you'd probably think India is full of a Billion pansies.

It's not about demonstrating one's religious beliefs, these things can be requirements of their faith. Orthodox Jews wear the yalmulke because they believe their head must be covered, Sikhs aren't supposed to cut their hair and just wear the turban to keep it in place (I think). These people aren't trying to make sure everyone who sees them knows their faith, they're trying to serve while remaining true to their faith.

bigtruckguy, the small hat that the hardcore jews wear is usually the same color as their hair, small, and cant be seen under the headgear when outdoors. you aren't going to hide that big ass turban and full beard under any type of headgear. the US Army has survived for over 237 years without them, we can survive another 237 years without them again. what exactly do they bring to the table that a regular Soldier who doesn't need concessions can't do, without all the drama? answer......NOTHING. whats next? wiccans allowed to wear a leaf over their junk during duty hours so they can be closer to nature at all times? all those wanting to serve their country while needing special privileges can join the peace corps or jobcorps and provide service to their country without the military having to pamper yet another sect because they feel special.

clarythedrill - I've always wanted a Lee Corso - "not so fast my friend" moment. Here it is.

quote:

---

the US Army has survived for over 237 years without them, we can survive another 237 years without them again. what exactly do they bring to the table that a regular Soldier who doesn't need concessions can't do, without all the drama? answer......NOTHING.

---

Take a look at our good friend who served in The Great War circa 1918.
Bhagat Singh Thind


There's a whole page on this stuff but I'll hit a few highlights.

quote:

---

Specialist Simran Preet Singh Lamba was granted a religious accommodation by the U.S. Army in September 2010. Specialist Lamba was recruited for his special language skills in Hindi and Punjabi through the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) program.

---

Personally, I don't know about you but my Hindi isn't real good. I can get through the madar chod and ban chod but after that, I lose it pretty quickly.

Now, keep in mind, I was a Tanker and luckily for me, I never had to see combat since my 8 years ended during peacetime in August 2001. But... I reckon if I were wounded in action, I wouldn't give a damn what the ER Doc had on his head.

quote:

---

Major Kamaljeet Singh Kalsi, an emergency medicine doctor, was granted a historic religious accommodation by the U.S. Army in October 2009 to maintain his religiously-mandated turban and beard.. After returning from Afghanistan, he was awarded a Bronze Star Medal in honor of his combat service.

---

I've seen worse.


And just so you know we're not alone, the Pommies have the same situation. Check out the guard detail at Buckingham Palace.



At times like this, you need to remember the world we live in. I think Chris Rock said it best when he made a joke about gays in the military. "Let 'em fight. I ain't fightin'"

EDIT: corrected my spelling and added the Hindi links to Urban Dictionary

[This message has been edited by HollywoodBQ (edited 1/24/2014 10:07a).]

Hollywood, I see the point you are trying to make, but in those examples you gave, that position would NOT have gone unfilled due to not having a Soldier who did not need a concession for a turban or beard. I am not questioning their patriotism or desire to serve, but they can serve in another capacity that is not the military, or conform to established rules. I just wonder, what is the end game with regards to individuality within the military? Pretty soon its going to end up a union instead of a uniformed military service. I shudder to think of what we will look like in 25 years.

Why do we chapter conscientious objectors out of the military? They have a desire to serve, and I am sure we can find a job for them to do that will keep them out of harms way and out of situations that would require them to take a life. Yet, we don't bend to them based on religious views, so why are we doing it for these other religious beliefs?

Your comparison just isn't there. It is a huge jump to co clusions you are making that this is even remotely the same as conscientious objectors.

Perhaps we should also adminsep those who medical determines need a no shave chit.

ProSandy, those on a shaving profile must still shave every few days AND keep their beard to a maximum length of 1/8th inch. huge difference between a 1/8th inch beard that is shaved every three days and a semi full bushy beard and a huge turban that will stand out a mile away. there are enough people who want to serve that don't demand huge concessions that makes these deviations unnecessary.

Why not let down syndrome people serve? They have the mental capacity to do some jobs just fine. If WWIII broke out and we needed every warm body to go catch bullets, my opinion would be different, but that isn't the situation now, and most likely, not in the future.

I would venture a guess that the majority of those for this are either non serving at this time or reservists. Active duty types DO NOT need this headache. And unfortunately, I don't think most commanders at any level will be willing to take a stand and deny any request for concessions based on "good order and discipline". This will be become a decisive matter I am afraid.

You must be kidding. Sikh = Down Syndrome? Did you think that was clever?

I've got bad news for you, we don't have enough qualified people to be turning away good applicants. Having a beard doesn't diminish discipline, ability, intelligence, or your pension. Hell, I had a full beard for 3 years on active duty.

Count me in the "quality over random grooming standards" camp. But then, I'm not threatened by other people's religious preferences...

tango mike, I don't give a crap about religions, I just don't think any concessions should be made for ANY group. If you think this is a religious issue, then explain why we chapter conscientious objectors, as I said above, we can find a warm soft spot for them to continue to serve and not worry about having to break their beliefs by killing someone.

as for the down syndrome comment, don't let your drawers get all in a bunch, as I am not comparing the two against each other, you did. I am only saying that as we continue to make changes for one or two groups, without a true need, we will eventually make concessions for every tom, dick, and harry who feel they have a right to serve.

again, why do we restrict fatasses and physically impaired from serving? A line against this BS needs to be drawn somewhere before we lose our identity as a disciplined uniform service.

The Army is holding a board as we speak to reduce the number of captains and majors because we need to downsize. I am sure there are just as many qualified majors and captains that will be released from service to fill the spot of that sikh captain if we told him "no thanks", and these majors and captains have been serving with no strings attached, instead of only serving if the military meets their "demands".

You have your opinion, and I have mine. I do see the argument from the other side, I just wholeheartedly disagree with these feel good policies.

We separate conscientious objectors because they refuse to do their job, not because of their religious preference.

Physically incapable people are denied/separated because they are... physically incapable. Having a beard is not a physical disability.

Bad captains and majors are being considered for separation, not just randomly selected people. Having a beard doesn't make you a poor leader.

The #1 problem in USAREC is finding people that are physically, morally, and intellectually fit for service. The #2 problem is finding those that are fit and want to serve. Arbitrarily reducing the pool of qualified applicants because one of them has a religious beard is the kind of idiocy I expect from bureaucrats

[This message has been edited by Tango mike (edited 1/25/2014 9:52a).]

quote:

---

I am sure there are just as many qualified majors and captains that will be released from service to fill the spot of that sikh captain if we told him "no thanks", and these majors and captains have been serving with no strings attached, instead of only serving if the military meets their "demands".

---

Keep in mind, I did pull my references from a pro-Sikh site but... the Sikh guys who want to serve have highly specialized skills. These aren't your typical Texas A&M ROTC graduate with a degree in Agricultural Economics or Wildlife & Fisheries Science. Those were some of the cakewalk majors from my era for guys whose only goal after college was to go in the Army. That was my goal too but, I managed to pickup and Engineering degree along the way

Do we need good doctors? - YES.
Do we need guys who speak Hindi and Punjabi?

Based on my vacation to Goa, India last October, I would say YES. Yes we do need more Hindi speakers because in case you didn't know, we're starting to train with the Indian forces. That's probably not for public consumption (at least you won't find it in the mainstream media) but, if you're on the ground, you'll notice a bunch of 20 somethings with USMC tattoos hanging out with a big 6'2" Sikh guy named Commander Singh.

Do we need more guys in the Army with Ag Eco degrees? We've probably got enough already. A little cull wouldn't hurt. BTW - my buddy who is an LTC with his 20 years already in, majored in Sociology. Bonus - he got to meet lots of A&M Football Players