Pentagon to Allow Beards, Turbans in Military

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
You weren’t exactly a regular enlistee though, were you TTR?

I mean I’ve heard of the standards being relaxed a good bit under certain circumstance and for people serving some specific functions. [/quote]

Well, that’s true. SF and boomers in the Navy have always had beards.

The entire no-beard thing, however, is a product of WWI, mustard gas, and ill-fitting masks.

The masks of today (which are a hood) will fit over all but a ZZ Top beard and gas just isn’t in the theater much ---- it was probably used in the early part of Desert Storm (and everyone lied and said it wasn’t used) and would be used in Syria, Korea (especially), and Iran, but we just aren’t there now. And it’s not like they can’t be shaved prior to getting to those places.[/quote]

That makes more sense than anything. Even I’m supposed to be clean shaven for work so that I can wear a respirator in anoxic and toxic environments.

82

As an infantry Marine currently serving and currently deployed to Afghanistan (3/7 YUT), here’s my opinion on the issue.

I think it’s ridiculous allowing those who practice Islam in the U.S. Military to allow them to wear their turbans and grow out their beards. Like someone said previously, they volunteered knowing there would be standards and regulations they must follow. No one is special. Sack up and shave like everyone else, and wear the fucking 8-point you’ve been issued. However, what you do on your off-time is your business. Wear whatever you want as long as it still adheres to civilian dress code regs.

On a more personal note, it would be one hard fucking pill to swallow for me to come home after fighting Taliban (who feel it is their RELIGIOUS DUTY to kill or maim my brothers in the name of Allah) and see some Marine wearing a digi-turban and a beard. And I know I wouldn’t be the only pissed off grunt among the ranks. But alas, I have no control over the decision making at the higher-echelon level so it’s one of those situations where we will have to sack up and deal with it or join the 1st Civ Div when our contract is up.

Also, now that I think of it, even our Afghan National Army counterparts are not allowed to wear Turbans in uniform. They still pray 5 times a day but I have never, EVER seen one wearing a turban, either they have on a black beret or garrison cover, or they wear nothing at all. And I’m willing to bet 99.9% of their fuckin military is Muslim, along with the rest of their country. So why would a Muslim country with a Muslim military not allow this piece of religious headgear in uniform? Because even these fucks understand the importance of uniformity and having a professional appearance. But hey you can do it in the U.S. military now? Sounds like peacocking to me, like some certain individuals just want to show everyone else they are different.

Just my thoughts. They may not be right, nor will many agree with me, but that’s the beauty of being American. I can bitch and complain all I want without the fear of my government literally beheading me. And the beauty of being a Marine is being able to sack up and deal with it without skipping a beat.

83

On a lighter note, for anyone who reads Duffel Blog, I thought this was a hilarious take on the pentagon’s decision Juggalos Get Pentagon OK To Wear Religious Face Paint In Uniform

84

2364×3000 974 KB

[quote]nikoreps wrote:
I can bitch and complain all I want without the fear of my government literally beheading me. And the beauty of being a Marine is being able to sack up and deal with it without skipping a beat.[/quote]

A very good friend of mine is a Marine Major about where you are. He opined last week that that when his Marines stop bitching, that is a clear sign that morale is low.

Photo Gen. Sherman, complete asshole, but pretty much a soldier’s general if there ever was one. Also, rather bearded.

Me, I am against beards for the selfish reason that we earned the right to our beards. Bit like when they gave everyone in the Army a beret.

85

[quote]nikoreps wrote:
As an infantry Marine currently serving and currently deployed to Afghanistan (3/7 YUT), here’s my opinion on the issue.

I think it’s ridiculous allowing those who practice Islam in the U.S. Military to allow them to wear their turbans and grow out their beards. Like someone said previously, they volunteered knowing there would be standards and regulations they must follow. No one is special. Sack up and shave like everyone else, and wear the fucking 8-point you’ve been issued. However, what you do on your off-time is your business. Wear whatever you want as long as it still adheres to civilian dress code regs.

On a more personal note, it would be one hard fucking pill to swallow for me to come home after fighting Taliban (who feel it is their RELIGIOUS DUTY to kill or maim my brothers in the name of Allah) and see some Marine wearing a digi-turban and a beard. And I know I wouldn’t be the only pissed off grunt among the ranks. But alas, I have no control over the decision making at the higher-echelon level so it’s one of those situations where we will have to sack up and deal with it or join the 1st Civ Div when our contract is up.

Also, now that I think of it, even our Afghan National Army counterparts are not allowed to wear Turbans in uniform. They still pray 5 times a day but I have never, EVER seen one wearing a turban, either they have on a black beret or garrison cover, or they wear nothing at all. And I’m willing to bet 99.9% of their fuckin military is Muslim, along with the rest of their country. So why would a Muslim country with a Muslim military not allow this piece of religious headgear in uniform? Because even these fucks understand the importance of uniformity and having a professional appearance. But hey you can do it in the U.S. military now? Sounds like peacocking to me, like some certain individuals just want to show everyone else they are different.

Just my thoughts. They may not be right, nor will many agree with me, but that’s the beauty of being American. I can bitch and complain all I want without the fear of my government literally beheading me. And the beauty of being a Marine is being able to sack up and deal with it without skipping a beat.[/quote]

My thoughts exactly.

86

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:
Genuine question for those who have served: How does this differ from everyone wearing whatever clothes they feel most comfortable in? Would such a policy be ok with you? Why or why not? Actually, same questions regarding hair styles, too…[/quote]

I’m not following your question Chusin. In uniform you don’t wear what is comfortable you wear authorized uniform attire. Same with hair/facial hair, there are regulations/standards that have to be adhered to. Do you mean off duty? If that’s the case, there are off duty clothing standards as well, which I also agree with. [/quote]

Yeah, I guess I’m really asking if there are good reasons for those regs/standards, and if said reasons apply to this as well, in the opinion of those who have experience.[/quote]

Chushin, sorry I missed this earlier.

Damn near all of the standards are for uniformity. You can gather quite a bit from the actual standards, here:

http://www.marcorsyscom.usmc.mil/sites/mcub/pages/uniform%20regs%20chapters/chapter%201_files/chapter%201.asp

Here is what the standards say about religious attire:

Subject to temporary revocation due to health, safety, or mission requirements, Marines may wear neat and conservative religious apparel items, as follows:

a. Articles of religious apparel which are not visible or apparent when worn with the uniform.

b. Visible articles of religious apparel with the uniform while attending or conducting divine services or while in a chapel or other house of worship.

c. Visible articles of religious apparel with the uniform which do not interfere with or replace required uniform articles.

87

[quote]nikoreps wrote:
As an infantry Marine currently serving and currently deployed to Afghanistan (3/7 YUT), here’s my opinion on the issue.

I think it’s ridiculous allowing those who practice Islam in the U.S. Military to allow them to wear their turbans and grow out their beards. Like someone said previously, they volunteered knowing there would be standards and regulations they must follow. No one is special. Sack up and shave like everyone else, and wear the fucking 8-point you’ve been issued. However, what you do on your off-time is your business. Wear whatever you want as long as it still adheres to civilian dress code regs.

On a more personal note, it would be one hard fucking pill to swallow for me to come home after fighting Taliban (who feel it is their RELIGIOUS DUTY to kill or maim my brothers in the name of Allah) and see some Marine wearing a digi-turban and a beard. And I know I wouldn’t be the only pissed off grunt among the ranks. But alas, I have no control over the decision making at the higher-echelon level so it’s one of those situations where we will have to sack up and deal with it or join the 1st Civ Div when our contract is up.

Also, now that I think of it, even our Afghan National Army counterparts are not allowed to wear Turbans in uniform. They still pray 5 times a day but I have never, EVER seen one wearing a turban, either they have on a black beret or garrison cover, or they wear nothing at all. And I’m willing to bet 99.9% of their fuckin military is Muslim, along with the rest of their country. So why would a Muslim country with a Muslim military not allow this piece of religious headgear in uniform? Because even these fucks understand the importance of uniformity and having a professional appearance. But hey you can do it in the U.S. military now? Sounds like peacocking to me, like some certain individuals just want to show everyone else they are different.

Just my thoughts. They may not be right, nor will many agree with me, but that’s the beauty of being American. I can bitch and complain all I want without the fear of my government literally beheading me. And the beauty of being a Marine is being able to sack up and deal with it without skipping a beat.[/quote]

Well that is pretty much a thread ender…good post.

89

I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument.

90

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

The men typically wear some sort of covering, varying from a skullcap to a rag to a turbin of some kind. Just depends on who they are.

They are pretty practical. After watching British special forces use them, we got permission to use keffiyeh (called the shemagh by the Brits) to keep dust out of our mouths when out and about. Basically, the same thing a cowboy does with a rag.

No clue if they have religious significance, but most everyone used them, usually with goggles, especially a gunners or crew exposed in a Bradly/tank/Humvee, to keep sand out of your face.

91

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

And what do we do with the Muslim WOMEN that want to join the armed services? Certainly they along with their ACLU lawyers will be lined up to support their “rights”.

What of them???

93

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

And what do we do with the Muslim WOMEN that want to join the armed services? Certainly they along with their ACLU lawyers will be lined up to support their “rights”.

What of them???[/quote]

Surely the women who cover from head to toe won’t be accommodated.

Right?[/quote]

Yeah, you would think. I mean, how could you tell if a woman in a full burka was an officer or an enlistee? Maybe they can stich their rank on said burka?

But what about the hijab? The hair covering is a REQUIREMENT. Does our military have to bend to accommodate again to the few? Of course this sounds crazy… but look at the article. How many more years are we away from that?

I was in during the late 1990s. It was simple.

  • I was told of the requirements and duties before I joined.
  • I gladly agreed to join.
  • I was told of my “rights”.
  • I followed my orders/directions without quibbling.
  • The military I observed that operated in this manner worked extremely well and was very effective.
94

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

And what do we do with the Muslim WOMEN that want to join the armed services? Certainly they along with their ACLU lawyers will be lined up to support their “rights”.

What of them???[/quote]

Surely the women who cover from head to toe won’t be accommodated.

Right?[/quote]
She wouldn’t want to or even be allowed to join in the first place. And not all Muslim women wear burqas. Not all wear head coverings. Like the head covering for men, it isn’t a religious law.

I don’t know why people complain when they have no one to blame but the founders of this nation. Americans want to proudly exclaim freedom of religion but then want exceptions…as long as those exceptions don’t affect “real” Americans.

In Italy it is illegal to wear anything that covers the face. It’s been a law since the 70s which was a reaction to terrorism (mainly of the domestic sort). Try passing a law like that here and see what happens. But that’s what you get for wanting a nation in which a citizen doesn’t have to put his country first. Of course the founders could not have anticipated the hold religion would have over people when it came to secular matters and they most certainly could not have anticipated the outward displays of religious belief by people.

95

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

And what do we do with the Muslim WOMEN that want to join the armed services? Certainly they along with their ACLU lawyers will be lined up to support their “rights”.

What of them???[/quote]

Surely the women who cover from head to toe won’t be accommodated.

Right?[/quote]
She wouldn’t want to or even be allowed to join in the first place. And not all Muslim women wear burqas. Not all wear head coverings. Like the head covering for men, it isn’t a religious law.

I don’t know why people complain when they have no one to blame but the founders of this nation. Americans want to proudly exclaim freedom of religion but then want exceptions…as long as those exceptions don’t affect “real” Americans.

In Italy it is illegal to wear anything that covers the face. It’s been a law since the 70s which was a reaction to terrorism (mainly of the domestic sort). Try passing a law like that here and see what happens. But that’s what you get for wanting a nation in which a citizen doesn’t have to put his country first. Of course the founders could not have anticipated the hold religion would have over people when it came to secular matters and they most certainly could not have anticipated the outward displays of religious belief by people. [/quote]

You don’t follow many ACLU suits, do you? OF COURSE this woman wouldn’t want to join! She would be a pawn in this legal game. She would be a “solider” of course, but it would not be for the U.S. government.

It’s about the slow erosion of our institutions, military included. This is their plan.

First rule: Know thy enemy.

96

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

I don’t know why people complain when they have no one to blame but the founders of this nation. Americans want to proudly exclaim freedom of religion but then want exceptions…as long as those exceptions don’t affect “real” Americans. [/quote]

I don’t know if that is the issue, or the issue is: “Hey this is the military, you forfeit certain things to fight for your country and you volunteer (for the most part) to do so.”

I mean, those that served know better than I, and maybe I am off base here, but I don’t think being told what you can wear, and when you can wear it, religious or otherwise, falls outside of the “this is the military, you gave up your rights when you signed that contract” clause.

Johnny Six Pack wants to walk down 6th Ave wearing a Superman costume and carry a cross the size of New Jersey, that is different than an active solider in uniform.

That being said, I don’t see what the big deal is, unless the religious dress prevents them form doing the job the military wants them to do. But I didn’t serve, so I render my own opinion on the actual topic weightless.

My understanding of early American life sort of outlines the total opposite of what you’ve written here.

I’m pretty sure the founders were well aware of religion, its deep roots in some people and surely witnessed, so no need to, anticipate the outward displays.

97

[quote]Brett620 wrote:
And was 100% preventable. All the warning signs were there. Political correctness got those people killed.[/quote]

I think you sound just like those ban gun folks right here in this comment.

To which I would imagine you’ll take offense to.

98

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

And what do we do with the Muslim WOMEN that want to join the armed services? Certainly they along with their ACLU lawyers will be lined up to support their “rights”.

What of them???[/quote]

Why are their rights in quotes? Are you making fun of the rights of Muslim WOMEN? Why would they be treated any differently? They shouldn’t. Either we all have rights or we all don’t. It’s not supposed to be a pick and choose thing. It keeps seeming like you really want different things for different people.

What does someone’s religion have to do with them having or not having rights? It seems as if the military would be fighting for rights for all, not just for the ones who you think are ok.

99

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
I don’t think Muslims are required to wear turbans (that’s more of a Sikh thing) or any head covering except when praying. They usually wear some sort of head covering because of tradition but I don’t think that it has to be a specific type so the idea that they will wear “religious” headgear in uniform is a non-argument. [/quote]

And what do we do with the Muslim WOMEN that want to join the armed services? Certainly they along with their ACLU lawyers will be lined up to support their “rights”.

What of them???[/quote]

Surely the women who cover from head to toe won’t be accommodated.

Right?[/quote]

Yeah, you would think. I mean, how could you tell if a woman in a full burka was an officer or an enlistee? Maybe they can stich their rank on said burka?

But what about the hijab? The hair covering is a REQUIREMENT. Does our military have to bend to accommodate again to the few? Of course this sounds crazy… but look at the article. How many more years are we away from that?

I was in during the late 1990s. It was simple.

  • I was told of the requirements and duties before I joined.
  • I gladly agreed to join.
  • I was told of my “rights”.
  • I followed my orders/directions without quibbling.
  • The military I observed that operated in this manner worked extremely well and was very effective.[/quote]

Please point to specific examples in the article that suggests huge changes ARE going to take place and that the changes will make the military any less effective. Like I said some people seem to think all of the sudden the military will let me serve to a gold cane, pair of stilts, and a super soaker as long as I say it’s part of my religion.

I believe many people in here are inventing a lot of scenarios that the article didn’t mention at all. In fact 5 years from now I bet the “changes” the article mentions are almost non existent.

By all means though be scared as hell of the following craziness:

[quote]Requests for religious accommodation can be denied when the “needs of mission accomplishment outweigh the needs of the service member,” the directive will explain.

The directive stresses that “the importance of uniformity and adhering to standards, of putting unit before self, is more significant and needs to be carefully evaluated when considering each request for accommodation.”

It goes on to say that “it is particularly important to consider the effect on unit cohesion.”[/quote]

By all means be terrified. That sounds AWFUL. Tuesday, January 24th with this move is the day the United States military became the worst in the world.

Thanks Obama. America is now over. We had a good run.

Let’s make sure we overreact as much as possible.

100

^ It’s about standards and regulations.

I guess you missed the recent article that the military is struggling with women passing the PT tests since they now have allowed them access to all combat opportunities.

Another example of putting people in positions that they can’t do the job, but it sounds like a great idea at a Georgetown cocktail party. Sure you don’t have the physical strength to drag me out of a foxhole if needed if I’m wounded, but hey- at least it’s PC.

Remember, the Isrealis have tried this and how did it work out?

I’m sure you missed it… I better try to find the link.

EDIT: Marines delay female fitness plan after half fail pull-up test | Fox News