"When work and religion clash" thread

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ghazkuul**

Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

If you honestly believe that then you have never been to Iraq or Afghanistan. Let me explain it to you in one simple word....Dust. ANYTHING wet in that country is immediately turned to mud. So instead of having a nicely jelled beard you would have a mud caked disgusting/disease filled beard that would never hold a good seal on a gas mask.

**Jihadin**

Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Again. Negative High Speed. Your original point was a full turban under the ACH. I even showed pics to clarify. The inside of a ACH and the actual turban the solder was wearing in Garrison which would go against the design of properly wearing the ACH to protect one's dome. You screwed the pooch. Deal with it. Your welcome though for me broaden your mind (us) on Turban that's worn over a underturban. You can now carry on

**Hordini**

Jihadin wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Again. Negative High Speed. Your original point was a full turban under the ACH. I even showed pics to clarify. The inside of a ACH and the actual turban the solder was wearing in Garrison which would go against the design of properly wearing the ACH to protect one's dome. You screwed the pooch. Deal with it. Your welcome though for me broaden your mind (us) on Turban that's worn over a underturban. You can now carry on

That was not my original point. Show me where I posted that. Sorry if you got butthurt due to being clueless on this issue and getting called on it. What other reason would you have for posting a photo of a full turban? Were you just trying to play a game of gotcha from the beginning? Or did you think that that was a requirement for observant Sikhs in the service?

**Jihadin**

Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:

cannot accommodate

won't fit and if so it would impede the design of the ACH to protect one's cranium

BS. Do some research. They've already proven that it can fit and that was one of the requirements for getting an exemption for the Sikh's currently in service. They had to be able to safely wear a kevlar on top of their turban and they had to be able to get a good seal on a gas mask, both of which they were able to do.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's a picture of one of the three currently serving observant Sikhs training with a kevlar over top of his turban. Doesn't seem to be impeding the design of the helmet to protect his cranium, does it?

Spoiler:

I bow to your superior knowledge on this

As for the beard your on your own against Ghaz

**Hordini**

Ghazkuul wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

If you honestly believe that then you have never been to Iraq or Afghanistan. Let me explain it to you in one simple word....Dust. ANYTHING wet in that country is immediately turned to mud. So instead of having a nicely jelled beard you would have a mud caked disgusting/disease filled beard that would never hold a good seal on a gas mask.

He would only have to keep it jellied if he was in an area at risk of chemical attack. If he was in an area at risk of chemical attack, there's a good chance he'd be wearing a MOPP suit or something similar as well (such as during the invasion of Iraq in 2003), and if he has a mask with a hood, the beard ceases to be an issue at all.. And sweat, grime, and sand can build up on a sweaty face as well. I think you're massively overstating the issue that a beard would cause, especially considering there are military forces across the world with beards who don't seem to have any issues and still use gas masks. SOCOM operators of various sorts wear beards in country on a regular basis.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:

cannot accommodate

won't fit and if so it would impede the design of the ACH to protect one's cranium

BS. Do some research. They've already proven that it can fit and that was one of the requirements for getting an exemption for the Sikh's currently in service. They had to be able to safely wear a kevlar on top of their turban and they had to be able to get a good seal on a gas mask, both of which they were able to do.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's a picture of one of the three currently serving observant Sikhs training with a kevlar over top of his turban. Doesn't seem to be impeding the design of the helmet to protect his cranium, does it?

Spoiler:

I bow to your superior knowledge on this

As for the beard your on your own against Ghaz

Okay. So it was an underturban, a type of turban, rather than his full turban. My mistake. What was your point again originally though? That the full turban wouldn't fit, even though that wasn't a requirement of their religion? Or did you know full well that they only needed to wear an underturban, which fit just fine, and you were just trying to play a pedantic game of gotcha by pointing out that a full turban and an underturban isn't the same thing, since I was just using the word "turban" rather than being more specific? Which is it again?

**Ghazkuul**

Hordini wrote:
Ghazkuul wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

If you honestly believe that then you have never been to Iraq or Afghanistan. Let me explain it to you in one simple word....Dust. ANYTHING wet in that country is immediately turned to mud. So instead of having a nicely jelled beard you would have a mud caked disgusting/disease filled beard that would never hold a good seal on a gas mask.

He would only have to keep it jellied if he was in an area at risk of chemical attack. If he was in an area at risk of chemical attack, there's a good chance he'd be wearing a MOPP suit or something similar as well (such as during the invasion of Iraq in 2003), and if he has a mask with a hood, the beard ceases to be an issue at all.. And sweat, grime, and sand can build up on a sweaty face as well. I think you're massively overstating the issue that a beard would cause, especially considering there are military forces across the world with beards who don't seem to have any issues and still use gas masks. SOCOM operators of various sorts wear beards in country on a regular basis.

difference being that sweaty/muddy skin will still form air tight seals, but not hairy beards. And incorrect, MOPP suits with the hood will not protect you if your mask isn't air tight. Its just a hoodie it isn't air tight. Also if you think it doesn't cause casualties, there are a few hundred/thousand? Iranians who would like a word with you.

SOCOM operate on their own rules, so using them to justify how the rest of the military operates is kinda...dumb

sorry not trying to be insulting but seriously they make up a fraction of a percent of the military.

**Hordini**

Ghazkuul wrote:

difference being that sweaty/muddy skin will still form air tight seals, but not hairy beards. And incorrect, MOPP suits with the hood will not protect you if your mask isn't air tight. Its just a hoodie it isn't air tight. Also if you think it doesn't cause casualties, there are a few hundred/thousand? Iranians who would like a word with you.

SOCOM operate on their own rules, so using them to justify how the rest of the military operates is kinda...dumb sorry not trying to be insulting but seriously they make up a fraction of a percent of the military.

Do you have any evidence that sweaty muddy skin will form an airtight seal but a sweaty, muddy, hairy beard will not? Not trying to be pedantic, but everything I've seen so far is that the "you can't get a good gas mask seal with a beard" is basically an old wives tale. I haven't seen any evidence to back it up.

Have you seen specific evidence that the Iranian casualties were caused due to lack of good gas mask seals due to wearing full beards? Again, not trying to be a dick about it, I'm legitimately curious.

And I'm not using the SOCOM thing as my primary justification, I know they are small and have their own rules, it was just another example that came to mind. Are troops currently in Afghanistan carrying gas masks on their person on a regular basis? I know they were during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, but is it currently still the case? I'm guessing the answer is no, since the threat of a chemical attack is likely slim. I also mentioned previously that conventional troops in more remote areas often grow facial hair, and that doesn't seem to have caused any substantial issues that I know of either, except for maybe driving some 1stSgt or SgtMaj somewhere crazy if they find out about it.

**Ghazkuul**

Well there is the "Medical Aspects of Chemical Weapons" or "Irans Military forces in Transition" which both attribute significant casualties to facial hair not allowing gas masks to create air tight seals.

**Hordini**

Ghazkuul wrote:
Well there is the "Medical Aspects of Chemical Weapons" or "Irans Military forces in Transition" which both attribute significant casualties to facial hair not allowing gas masks to create air tight seals.

Were they able to determine that it was primarily a beard issue, rather than a training issue? That is, if the users had had better training, might they have been able to achieve a good seal with the beard, or did the beard actually make achieving a good seal physically impossible?

I'm just wanting to make sure. I'm also not sure if the dust and vaseline issue would be as big of an issue as you think. I find it unlikely that it would be any worse than cammie paint mixed with sweat and dust. It seems like the Army did a lot of tests with the Sikh soldiers to ensure they could achieve a good seal, and I doubt it would have been approved if they still had concerns about achieving a good seal in country. Major Kalsi talks about getting a good seal in this interview and doesn't mention if he uses vaseline or not, but he did mention getting tested several times, and achieving a good seal each time.

**squidhills**

Okay, so years and years ago I worked in a book store. The book store stocked magazines of various types, up to and including nudie mags. We had a guy on staff who worked the morning shift and stocked all the magazines. We had a lot of magazines... a lot a lot. Stocking them all could take two hours. This guy was a youth pastor and a pretty devout Christian. He asked if someone other than he could stock the nudie mags, not because he was opposed to them on religious grounds, but because many members of his congregation were opposed to them and he didn't want to be seen stocking them by anyone he knew from church. I was in charge of newspapers (among other things), so I figured I could help this guy out. I'd be up near the magazines anyway, and it was only like four titles I had to stock for him. So this guy asked for help and I told my supervisor I would cover for him, and *bam*! We had a reasonable accommodation.

I really liked that guy. He was cool.

**Smacks**

Hordini wrote:
And not to minimize your beliefs, but your deeply held personal philosophical beliefs are not the same as a well-established religion.

I think that does minimize his beliefs, and I find your attitude actually quite offensive (if not to my person, then to my sensibilities). Why should one "deeply held" belief be superior to any other? Especially when it is largely unprovable superstition, and who are you or anyone to say that someone's belief isn't deeply held enough? My beard is a part of my body, it's literally in my DNA, handed down to me from my ancestors, sculpted by nature itself for some purpose. Why should my beard be considered any less important to me than a religious person's beard is to him?

**Hordini**

Smacks wrote:
Hordini wrote:
And not to minimize your beliefs, but your deeply held personal philosophical beliefs are not the same as a well-established religion.
I think that does minimize his beliefs, and I find your attitude actually quite offensive (if not to my person, then to my sensibilities). Why should one "deeply held" belief be superior to any other? Especially when it is largely unprovable superstition, and who are you or anyone to say that someone's belief isn't deeply held enough? My beard is a part of my body, it's literally in my DNA, handed down to me from my ancestors, sculpted by nature itself for some purpose. Why should my beard be considered any less important to me than a religious person's beard is to him?

Nowhere did I make the claim that one deeply held belief was superior than any other, or that someone's belief is or is not "deeply held enough." What does that even mean? What would a belief be deeply held enough for? All I said was that a person's deeply held philosophical beliefs are not the same as a well-established religion, and I still stand by that statement. Being different does not make any argument for or against one being superior to the other. Are you arguing that they are the same? Are philosophical beliefs the same as religious beliefs? They can certainly be similar, I will grant that. That does not make them the same.

I think you may be reading into my post claims that I did not make.

**Smacks**

Hordini wrote:
Nowhere did I make the claim that one deeply held belief was superior than any other, or that someone's belief is or is not "deeply held enough." What does that even mean? What would a belief be deeply held enough for? All I said was that a person's deeply held philosophical beliefs are not the same as a well-established religion, and I still stand by that statement. Being different does not make any argument for or against one being superior to the other. Are you arguing that they are the same? Are philosophical beliefs the same as religious beliefs? They can certainly be similar, I will grant that. That does not make them the same.

I think you may be reading into my post claims that I did not make.

Bromsy asked "Sikhs get to ignore grooming standards based on their religion, why can't I ignore them based on my deeply held personal philosophical beliefs(?)"

To which you replied his beliefs were not the same. The context is you saying that his deeply held personal beliefs are not sufficiant to allow him to ignore grooming standards, while a religious person's beliefs are. I can only conclude that you must find his beliefs inferior in some way. What else could you possibly have been saying with that response?

And yes, for the purposes of law etc.. I would argue that they are the same. Why should a religious person's deeply held beliefs be any more important than mine?

**Relapse**

Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

Do you realize how crapped up with dirt and small rocks a vasolined beard would get in a field operation, totally negating any benifits of sealing it might give?

Checked a few places and they all say gas masks are an issue and the army allows two or three guys to maintain their beards, one of which appears to be a dentist.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhs_in_the_United_States_military

**notprop**

I'm not sure why there is any controversy about having Sihks in your armed forces, the Sihk peoples have had a long and fine tradition of of Military service wherever they have served.

Like the Gurka regiments Britain raised our own Sihk regiments after facing the skill and ferocity of Sihk armies.

Indeed it would seem that the British Army have looked at reforming old Sihk regiments in the British army after an influx of Sihk recruits and belief there is a bigger resource to tap.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11430070/British-Army-examines-plans-to-create-a-Sikh-regiment.html

Note the complete lack of mention of head gear and the inclusion of Sihks in Air Corp, Scots and Guards regiments all looking as spick and span as any of their fellow soldiers, as one would expect from a Britsh Serviceman.

The US would do well to tap into this resource as I'm sure you have a significant Indian population like the UK.

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
Amish communities demonstrated that they were able to get a good seal using SCBA masks to be exempt from OSHA rules that firefighters be clean shaven for mask use.

Shame the DMV are still unlikely to hire Amish workers though

**d-usa**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:

The Duffel Blog was on the case as usual:

Army Clerk Refuses To Issue DD214s

FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. — Based on her deeply held beliefs of the “sanctity of military service,” admin clerk Spc. Kim David has been refusing to issue DD214s to service members whose records do not share her military service values, Duffel Blog has learned.

“It wasn’t a spur of the moment decision,” said David. “It was thought out, and I consulted the army values, all seven of them, before taking these actions.”

Spc. David’s actions — or lack thereof — have stirred controversy across the installation, drawing sharp criticism from those who feel the 19-year-old clerk is obligated to perform her duties as assigned regardless of her beliefs, while others complain she should not be evaluating others’ service after she was caught using her Government Travel Card to buy Joel Osteen DVDs.

Some soldiers have come to her defense, seeing her stance as bravery in the face of the deteriorating power of the E-4 mafia.

“David doesn’t have to process anyone’s DD214 that doesn’t embody the army values like we do,” said Spc. Trevor Koch, a medic and vocal supporter of David’s growing contingent. “Just the other day, I did a multi-source feedback on one of the lieutenants in the unit. Looked like everyone said he was a gak-bird. That’s why I’m not going to update his vaccinations properly in MEDPROs.”

Spc. John David Riley, the first soldier David refused to process a DD214 for, did nothing above standard for the army and deserved to continue serving until he distinguished himself, said David, when called before a judge at her Court Martial.

Riley is still waiting on a folding chair assuming that any minute now his DD214 will be complete and could not be reached for comment.

David, a Rowan County, Ky. native, testified that she joined the army to be a cook and was forced into the administration position. She asserted she never would have volunteered for a position where she would be forced to provide services to soldiers who have not served up to her standards.

David herself has previously collected a string of Article 15’s for public indecency, dereliction of duty, and misappropriation of government equipment in addition to the investigation into her Government Travel Card Charges.

“I’ve made mistakes,” said David. “I know I have. But I’m only accountable to the army. I can’t be fired. No one else on this post knows how to generate a DD214.”

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Poor married men.

Blamed for not supporting their wives. Blamed for supporting their wives.

Do like I did and marry up. She has to support me and the fat wiener dog snoring on my chest.

**Ghazkuul**

d-usa wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:

The Duffel Blog was on the case as usual:

Army Clerk Refuses To Issue DD214s

FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. — Based on her deeply held beliefs of the “sanctity of military service,” admin clerk Spc. Kim David has been refusing to issue DD214s to service members whose records do not share her military service values, Duffel Blog has learned.

“It wasn’t a spur of the moment decision,” said David. “It was thought out, and I consulted the army values, all seven of them, before taking these actions.”

Spc. David’s actions — or lack thereof — have stirred controversy across the installation, drawing sharp criticism from those who feel the 19-year-old clerk is obligated to perform her duties as assigned regardless of her beliefs, while others complain she should not be evaluating others’ service after she was caught using her Government Travel Card to buy Joel Osteen DVDs.

Some soldiers have come to her defense, seeing her stance as bravery in the face of the deteriorating power of the E-4 mafia.

“David doesn’t have to process anyone’s DD214 that doesn’t embody the army values like we do,” said Spc. Trevor Koch, a medic and vocal supporter of David’s growing contingent. “Just the other day, I did a multi-source feedback on one of the lieutenants in the unit. Looked like everyone said he was a gak-bird. That’s why I’m not going to update his vaccinations properly in MEDPROs.”

Spc. John David Riley, the first soldier David refused to process a DD214 for, did nothing above standard for the army and deserved to continue serving until he distinguished himself, said David, when called before a judge at her Court Martial.

Riley is still waiting on a folding chair assuming that any minute now his DD214 will be complete and could not be reached for comment.

David, a Rowan County, Ky. native, testified that she joined the army to be a cook and was forced into the administration position. She asserted she never would have volunteered for a position where she would be forced to provide services to soldiers who have not served up to her standards.

David herself has previously collected a string of Article 15’s for public indecency, dereliction of duty, and misappropriation of government equipment in addition to the investigation into her Government Travel Card Charges.

“I’ve made mistakes,” said David. “I know I have. But I’m only accountable to the army. I can’t be fired. No one else on this post knows how to generate a DD214.”

I love Duffelblog, but if that ever happened in real life it would sort itself out in a single day. 1 armory on base would be missing a grenade and the Clerk would have a new impressively large butthole...unfortunately they would be dead but...ohh well

**Inquisitor Lord Bane**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Amish communities demonstrated that they were able to get a good seal using SCBA masks to be exempt from OSHA rules that firefighters be clean shaven for mask use.

Shame the DMV are still unlikely to hire Amish workers though

I haven't lol'd that hard in a while. I've seen a car salesman who employs the Amish near Ephrata, PA.

Most bishops around here are liberal with "word processors" if it's work related. A few are ok with cars if its blacked out (bumpers, grill, whole nine yards). But theres maybe 2 DMVs in all of PA Amish country.

**Hordini**

Relapse wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

Do you realize how crapped up with dirt and small rocks a vasolined beard would get in a field operation, totally negating any benifits of sealing it might give?

Checked a few places and they all say gas masks are an issue and the army allows two or three guys to maintain their beards, one of which appears to be a dentist.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhs_in_the_United_States_military

Do you have any actual evidence that that is the case? I mean, sure, it sounds like it could be the case but I find it unlikely that the Army would have approved these three Sikh soldiers if it was going to be as big of an issue as you think. And I've only seen one of the Sikh's soldiers mention using vaseline, so I'm wondering if the others have been able to get a good seal without using any. Everything I've read has said that all of the Sikh soldiers were required to achieve a good seal with their gas masks, and all of them were able to do so, with at least one being tested multiple times. I've only seen one reference to one of them using vaseline. The only mention of vaseline I've seen is a quote by Captain Rattan who said

"My uncle, who was in the Indian Army, said he had no problem with that while was engaged in jungle warfare. He said he put some Vaseline in his beard, which kept the ticks away, and it sealed every single time."

So his uncle doesn't seem to have had a problem during field operations. In a desert environment it might be different, but I doubt the Army would have allowed it if they suspected that would be the case.

Other than that quote, I haven't seen another mention of any of the three observant Sikhs in the US military using vaseline to achieve a seal.

**Ghazkuul**

Hordini wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

Do you realize how crapped up with dirt and small rocks a vasolined beard would get in a field operation, totally negating any benifits of sealing it might give?

Checked a few places and they all say gas masks are an issue and the army allows two or three guys to maintain their beards, one of which appears to be a dentist.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhs_in_the_United_States_military

Do you have any actual evidence that that is the case? I mean, sure, it sounds like it could be the case but I find it unlikely that the Army would have approved these three Sikh soldiers if it was going to be as big of an issue as you think. And I've only seen one of the Sikh's soldiers mention using vaseline, so I'm wondering if the others have been able to get a good seal without using any.

Not to be a dick, but you have 2-3 actual service members who have gone through several renditions of gas mask training, and between us have probably been in the gas chamber over a hundred times. we are all saying it is impossible to get a gas mask to work 100% with a beard. hell its hard to get a good seal without any obstructions, females have it the worst because of the long hair, they have to specifically have ALL of their hair in a bun and out of their faces or the mask won't seal and they get doused with CS gas which is fairly unpleasant.

The US army isn't going to put out a publication for why the Sikh's are allowed to have beards and then say flat out that they can't use a gas mask correctly if the need ever arises. If you would like I can put you into contact with 2 NBC Marines I still talk to. (NBC - Nuclear Biological Chemical). And you can take the word of 2 experts in the field.

**Hordini**

Ghazkuul wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
Negative High Speed. That was not the route you took. I showed a full scale turban and a ACH and you went with that saying "Yes". I show a Under turbin that's like a neck gator that fits under the ACH. You screwed up not I. So carry on

Also your welcome for the clarification. Also show me in AR670-1 that covers this.

Okay. He's still able to wear an underturban with a Kevlar and is able to meet the requirements of his religion, which was my original point. It's obvious you were unfamiliar with the entire issue, otherwise you wouldn't have been posting misleading, irrelevant content. Because quite frankly it doesn't matter if they can fit their full turban underneath the Kevlar when an underturban will suffice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ghazkuul wrote:
The gas mask one is BS though. The jelly is wonderful when your going into a gas chamber and you don't have to worry about getting the mask on quickly, but seeing as the accepted military practice is donning, clearing and checking your gas mask in 9 seconds, I don't think he has enough time to grease up that beard of his and put his mask on in that time frame. So in a real combat environment where chemical/biological threats are real.....he is a liability.

It wouldn't be difficult to keep the beard jellied up if you're operating in an area with a high threat of chemical attack.

Do you realize how crapped up with dirt and small rocks a vasolined beard would get in a field operation, totally negating any benifits of sealing it might give?

Checked a few places and they all say gas masks are an issue and the army allows two or three guys to maintain their beards, one of which appears to be a dentist.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhs_in_the_United_States_military

Do you have any actual evidence that that is the case? I mean, sure, it sounds like it could be the case but I find it unlikely that the Army would have approved these three Sikh soldiers if it was going to be as big of an issue as you think. And I've only seen one of the Sikh's soldiers mention using vaseline, so I'm wondering if the others have been able to get a good seal without using any.

Not to be a dick, but you have 2-3 actual service members who have gone through several renditions of gas mask training, and between us have probably been in the gas chamber over a hundred times. we are all saying it is impossible to get a gas mask to work 100% with a beard. hell its hard to get a good seal without any obstructions, females have it the worst because of the long hair, they have to specifically have ALL of their hair in a bun and out of their faces or the mask won't seal and they get doused with CS gas which is fairly unpleasant.

The US army isn't going to put out a publication for why the Sikh's are allowed to have beards and then say flat out that they can't use a gas mask correctly if the need ever arises. If you would like I can put you into contact with 2 NBC Marines I still talk to. (NBC - Nuclear Biological Chemical). And you can take the word of 2 experts in the field.

Not to be a dick, but why are you so sure I haven't been through gas mask training? Have any of you been through gas mask training with anyone with a beard? Yes, I've heard people say that it is difficult or impossible to get a good seal with a gas mask with a beard, but all of those people have only done training while clean shaven and to my knowledge have never actually tried to achieve a seal with a beard themselves, or seen someone do it. To me it sounds like "common knowledge" that has gone untested for so long that everyone believes that it's true but nobody has actually tested it. And now we have Sikh soldiers in the Army who have been able to consistently get a good seal while wearing beards, and that makes me think that the previous "common knowledge" might be wrong.

Have any of those NBC Marines you know tried to get a good seal with a beard? Have they done gas mask training with beards? Have they trained with someone who has? Or did their platoon commander, SNCOIC or NCOIC or whatever the case may be tell them "You can't get a good seal with a beard" because that's what their seniors told them, and that's what their seniors told them, and so on and so forth, while the whole time none of them have ever tried to get a seal with anything but a clean shaven face?

That's my point. I've heard plenty of people say you can't get a good seal with a beard, none of which have actually tried to do it. Now we have several guys who have done it (and a long history of guys who have done it in Sikh units in the Indian Army and the British Army) and now we still have guys who have only ever done gas mask training with a clean shaven face saying how it can't be done.

**Ghazkuul**

I have cited experts in the field, and have given you 2 publications where casualties were directly attributed to beards getting in the way of gas masks achieving a proper seal. What more would you like? would you like me to go to the gas chamber next week with a beard and get some CS in my face?

**Hordini**

Ghazkuul wrote:
I have cited experts in the field, and have given you 2 publications where casualties were directly attributed to beards getting in the way of gas masks achieving a proper seal. What more would you like? would you like me to go to the gas chamber next week with a beard and get some CS in my face?

That might help.

It seems at this point there is conflicting evidence in both directions, since on the one hand we have bearded soldiers currently serving and bearded soldiers throughout history in the British and Indian armies who have been able to achieve good seals, and on the other hand reports that bearded Iranian soldiers weren't able to get good seals during chemical attacks. I'll look into the publications you mentioned earlier. I'm curious how much training and type of mask might be a factor (or not, as the case may be).

**Ghazkuul**

Hordini wrote:
Ghazkuul wrote:
I have cited experts in the field, and have given you 2 publications where casualties were directly attributed to beards getting in the way of gas masks achieving a proper seal. What more would you like? would you like me to go to the gas chamber next week with a beard and get some CS in my face?

That might help.

It seems at this point there is conflicting evidence in both directions, since on the one hand we have bearded soldiers currently serving and bearded soldiers throughout history in the British and Indian armies who have been able to achieve good seals, and on the other hand reports that bearded Iranian soldiers weren't able to get good seals during chemical attacks. I'll look into the publications you mentioned earlier. I'm curious how much training and type of mask might be a factor (or not, as the case may be).

there is no conflicting evidence. If given plenty of warning, and time anyone can make a beard air tight by application of grease or Vaseline. The problem is you can't walk around in a war with your face covered in vaseline the entire time, nor can you give someone ample time to don the gas mask. It is when someone has to don the mask quickly and in a war time situation that this becomes an issue. And as far as the conflicting reports, you have 1 bearded soldier saying he was able to get a good seal IN TRAINING and the same guy saying his uncle or whatever did the same thing. What you have on the other hand is actual war time evidence.

**Relapse**

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Amish communities demonstrated that they were able to get a good seal using SCBA masks to be exempt from OSHA rules that firefighters be clean shaven for mask use.

Shame the DMV are still unlikely to hire Amish workers though

I haven't lol'd that hard in a while. I've seen a car salesman who employs the Amish near Ephrata, PA.

Most bishops around here are liberal with "word processors" if it's work related. A few are ok with cars if its blacked out (bumpers, grill, whole nine yards). But theres maybe 2 DMVs in all of PA Amish country.

When I lived in Berks county, in southeast PA, we had "black bumper" Mennonites like what you describe. The younger kids had some of the best muscle cars cruising Lebanon on a Saturday night.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hordini wrote:
Ghazkuul wrote:
I have cited experts in the field, and have given you 2 publications where casualties were directly attributed to beards getting in the way of gas masks achieving a proper seal. What more would you like? would you like me to go to the gas chamber next week with a beard and get some CS in my face?

That might help.

It seems at this point there is conflicting evidence in both directions, since on the one hand we have bearded soldiers currently serving and bearded soldiers throughout history in the British and Indian armies who have been able to achieve good seals, and on the other hand reports that bearded Iranian soldiers weren't able to get good seals during chemical attacks. I'll look into the publications you mentioned earlier. I'm curious how much training and type of mask might be a factor (or not, as the case may be).

Just out of curiosity, you have alluded to yourself going through gas mask training. Is this true, and if so, what was it? Without a doubt Sikhs are some serious badasses who anyone would do well to have on their side, but I am going to agree with Ghaz and Jihadin that beards are going to mess up a seal eventually. I won't say it'll be 100%, but I wouldn't bet my life on it not making a difference.

**Grey Templar**

I would say its certainly possible to get a good seal with a beard, but at the same time its probably quite difficult. There is also the exact growth of the beard itself which factors in.

Ultimately, having a beard probably severely increases the danger of not getting a good seal. Especially if extra steps need to be taken to apply it, when you might only have seconds in the event of an actual gas attack.

**Hordini**

Smacks wrote:
Hordini wrote:
Nowhere did I make the claim that one deeply held belief was superior than any other, or that someone's belief is or is not "deeply held enough." What does that even mean? What would a belief be deeply held enough for? All I said was that a person's deeply held philosophical beliefs are not the same as a well-established religion, and I still stand by that statement. Being different does not make any argument for or against one being superior to the other. Are you arguing that they are the same? Are philosophical beliefs the same as religious beliefs? They can certainly be similar, I will grant that. That does not make them the same.

I think you may be reading into my post claims that I did not make.
Bromsy asked "Sikhs get to ignore grooming standards based on their religion, why can't I ignore them based on my deeply held personal philosophical beliefs(?)"

To which you replied his beliefs were not the same. The context is you saying that his deeply held personal beliefs are not sufficiant to allow him to ignore grooming standards, while a religious person's beliefs are. I can only conclude that you must find his beliefs inferior in some way. What else could you possibly have been saying with that response?

And yes, for the purposes of law etc.. I would argue that they are the same. Why should a religious person's deeply held beliefs be any more important than mine?

On a personal level I agree with you, but we are talking about the Army here, and they are going to have a higher bar for any sort of exemption. If Sikh's, with the backing of a well-established religion have had trouble in the past getting an exemption, an individual with individual philosophical beliefs is going to have an even harder time. That said, a soldier could theoretically request an exemption (which most likely would not be granted). I'm sorry if I offended you.

**motyak**

You guys better start emailing the British, Indian and all other armies with Sikh members, they dont know they danger they've put those soldiers, and the soldiers around them, in by allowing these bearded menaces into the field!