DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Muslim Junior ROTC Student Wants to Wear Head Cover With Uniform

**vicgirl** · 10-23-2011, 12:11 AM

Maybe you should go back and actually READ the article (or one of the many others -OR the entire thread dedicated to the subject)... First off, Medical Officers don't even go to basic training. Second, EVERY word I typed was true. The article was dated the 25th of March and the first one started the Basic Officer Leadership Course on the 19th of March. They started school under the Army program more than four years ago and the decision to actually honor the committment the Army made more than four years ago was communicated 1 Dec. Like I said, the Army promised one thing then once they were on the hook, tried to F--k them.

Noted but according to your original post, you would still ban religious undergarmets which you now say you wouldn't...

Hmm...maybe you should re-read my post. I don't think I said anything about banning religious undergarments AND I actually copied for you what I had originally typed in the first post. Reading comprehension? I guess I shouldn't have used the word "religious garb" and should have said no one should wear it "outside" their uniform.

Again for your comprehension THIS is from my ORIGINAL post: It is just JRTOC though which means really nothing. Again I don't think anyone should be wearing religious clothing while in uniform. Wear a religious token on a chain with your dog tags, have something in your pocket, etc fine. It just starts causing all these exception rules. Just my opinion.

Didn't change it after your comment, that's what I started with.

Oh and the Sikh I read about wasn't officers - there was a male Sikh who went through BASIC training - all 10 weeks - with his beard, hair, turban. Maybe what you said happened but that's not what I was referring to.

So here's the article you're referring to: http://www.army.mil/article/36339/

Got it. That was right. But not ALL Sikhs are treated that way. See following:

http://www.army.mil/article/47924/ke...asic-training/

http://www.army.mil/article/58866/Si...ling_to_serve/

So therefore what I was talking about was correct and what you were was correct. I thought I read that you stated they did this to ALL Sikhs and they didn't. Misunderstandings happen. Maybe though you should take a breath before you freak out on someone's post...

No here was your post: Not sure if you read the story or kept up with it or not but it wasn't that simple. Essentially the Army told them they would make an exception to policy for them, they went to school on the Army's dime, then when the time came for them to go AD (a condition of the Army paying for school) the Army tried to go back on their original promise and make them shave and ditch the turban...

This I wasn't talking about in my post at all. I was talking about the Sikh who had to go through basic because he wasn't a citizen so he couldn't be an officer and is a SPC.

10-23-2011, 12:11 AM	#12
vicgirl Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 363 Senior Member	Maybe you should go back and actually READ the article (or one of the many others -OR the entire thread dedicated to the subject)... First off, Medical Officers don't even go to basic training. Second, EVERY word I typed was true. The article was dated the 25th of March and the first one started the Basic Officer Leadership Course on the 19th of March. They started school under the Army program more than four years ago and the decision to actually honor the committment the Army made more than four years ago was communicated 1 Dec. Like I said, the Army promised one thing then once they were on the hook, tried to F--k them. Noted but according to your original post, you would still ban religious undergarmets which you now say you wouldn't... Hmm...maybe you should re-read my post. I don't think I said anything about banning religious undergarments AND I actually copied for you what I had originally typed in the first post. Reading comprehension? I guess I shouldn't have used the word "religious garb" and should have said no one should wear it "outside" their uniform. Again for your comprehension THIS is from my ORIGINAL post: It is just JRTOC though which means really nothing. Again I don't think anyone should be wearing religious clothing while in uniform. Wear a religious token on a chain with your dog tags, have something in your pocket, etc fine. It just starts causing all these exception rules. Just my opinion. Didn't change it after your comment, that's what I started with. Oh and the Sikh I read about wasn't officers - there was a male Sikh who went through BASIC training - all 10 weeks - with his beard, hair, turban. Maybe what you said happened but that's not what I was referring to. So here's the article you're referring to: http://www.army.mil/article/36339/ Got it. That was right. But not ALL Sikhs are treated that way. See following: http://www.army.mil/article/47924/ke...asic-training/ http://www.army.mil/article/58866/Si...ling_to_serve/ So therefore what I was talking about was correct and what you were was correct. I thought I read that you stated they did this to ALL Sikhs and they didn't. Misunderstandings happen. Maybe though you should take a breath before you freak out on someone's post... No here was your post: Not sure if you read the story or kept up with it or not but it wasn't that simple. Essentially the Army told them they would make an exception to policy for them, they went to school on the Army's dime, then when the time came for them to go AD (a condition of the Army paying for school) the Army tried to go back on their original promise and make them shave and ditch the turban... This I wasn't talking about in my post at all. I was talking about the Sikh who had to go through basic because he wasn't a citizen so he couldn't be an officer and is a SPC.
	Quote