Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Old Troop

(1,991 posts)
13. Several things come to mind...
Wed Jul 25, 2012, 05:25 PM
Jul 2012

First, the good major observed Army grooming regulations throughout his career to the day of his horrible act. Therefore he either didn't feel that that tenet of his faith was unalterable or it was done to ensure that he didn't stand out physically before he committed the murders. Regardless, he was comfortable enough with being clean shaven that it wasn't an issue until now.
Second, he remains a serving officer in the Army, subject to the rules and regulations that apply to all officers who haven't requested a waiver to Army grooming standards. He has not requested a waiver, he has demanded recognition of a fait accompli.
Third, Islamic dominated countries require adherence to many of their customs and regulations by westerners living or traveling in those countries. For instance, western woman are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia and must be accompanied by a male in the souks or malls.
I think that the Army has every right to insist that this man continue to observe the standards that he accepted when he swore his oath.

Post removed Post removed Jul 2012 #1
This forcible shaving is not only petty, but makes the prosecution look religiously motivated leveymg Jul 2012 #2
I agree 100%. elleng Jul 2012 #3
Quite the opposite jberryhill Jul 2012 #4
Good point. nt Doremus Jul 2012 #21
True. And he joined the military treestar Jul 2012 #85
Could they? Probably. cstanleytech Jul 2012 #5
The US Army issued a waiver to a Sikh Officer a few years ago. They can, if they want to. leveymg Jul 2012 #8
the Sikh did not commit mass murder samsingh Jul 2012 #17
And do you really think that Hasan has gone to his commanding officer TouchOfGray Jul 2012 #24
The Sikh asked first probably Confusious Jul 2012 #30
So? I said they probably could I didn't they "couldn't". cstanleytech Jul 2012 #32
There's a difference between a guy who requests a waiver in order to serve Codeine Jul 2012 #39
Sikhs are not allowed to cut their hair ever--as an expression of faith. MADem Jul 2012 #53
Please note, the ARMY has special rules as to Sikhs happyslug Jul 2012 #76
So it's OK to the rest of the world for a "devout Muslim" to go on a murderous rampage TouchOfGray Jul 2012 #6
No matter. We should avoid the appearance of religious persecution or bias. leveymg Jul 2012 #10
This is not a civilian trial jberryhill Jul 2012 #29
This. He is still a soldier at this point. LiberalLoner Jul 2012 #37
His religion is not on trial Confusious Jul 2012 #31
He is a soldier, not a civilian obamanut2012 Jul 2012 #46
He volunteered for the military 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #54
I don't think tolerance of the one implicitly expresses tolerance for the other... LanternWaste Jul 2012 #65
He's a devout asshole. Robb Jul 2012 #7
Was he a devout Muslim with a beard before he went on his rampage? n/t Control-Z Jul 2012 #15
Nope 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #55
i'm with the military on this one samsingh Jul 2012 #18
i hope the death penalty applies in this case samsingh Jul 2012 #20
I disagree. He is still in the military so he can damned well follow the rules. kestrel91316 Jul 2012 #23
My thought exactly sounds like revenge and power to me gopiscrap Jul 2012 #28
It is against military regulations obamanut2012 Jul 2012 #45
He has a US Army commission, and he's being paid commensurate with his rank. MADem Jul 2012 #52
The personal grooming and men's fragrance lobby are in the wings of this mental health provider's bobthedrummer Jul 2012 #69
disagree .. he is being required to adhere littlewolf Jul 2012 #83
maybe Romney could do it Enrique Jul 2012 #9
This jerk had no problem shaving... Stargazer09 Jul 2012 #11
I'm so sorry for you and your friend's loss leftynyc Jul 2012 #50
Thank you Stargazer09 Jul 2012 #78
He lost all his freedoms the day he pulled the trigger. Terrillary Jul 2012 #12
agreed samsingh Jul 2012 #19
No, he didnt lose them then and he doesnt until hes convicted. cstanleytech Jul 2012 #33
Sure he did. He's not walking around free. He's being told what to do and when to do it. IndyJones Jul 2012 #86
This isn't about his freedoms. It's about perceptions (right or wrong) that this is about religion. leveymg Jul 2012 #41
If the rest of the world leftynyc Jul 2012 #51
He didn't have a problem shaving before this 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #56
We would grant an exception for our own reasons, not his. leveymg Jul 2012 #59
Given that he killed a large number of his comrades in cold-blood and entirely 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #60
The political Islam aspect of the crime is why we need to avoid appearance of discrimination, leveymg Jul 2012 #61
How is it discrimination to hold him to the exact same standard we'd hold anyone else to 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #62
Appearance of mistreatment or unjust treatment is the thing to be avoided. leveymg Jul 2012 #64
Letting him keep the beard will prejudice his jury. Its not standard military grooming riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #67
I really doubt that's adequate grounds to overturn a conviction. Really, really doubt it. leveymg Jul 2012 #70
A beard is not a religious requirement in Islam just like the burqa riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #72
The kind of people who would declare jihad 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #74
If we let him keep the beard then it WOULD be about religion riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #63
I disagree with that. However, as he is military, that is a big loss of being able to do what you uppityperson Jul 2012 #44
Several things come to mind... Old Troop Jul 2012 #13
Hypocrite. Ikonoklast Jul 2012 #14
not shooting innocent people is something i believe in samsingh Jul 2012 #16
His ass belongs to the Army until he's discharged or executed slackmaster Jul 2012 #22
Yep! IndyJones Jul 2012 #87
hire Mitt Romney to attack the guy with scissors, and throw him to the ground for shave nt msongs Jul 2012 #25
good one! spooky3 Jul 2012 #26
Sad to see such a religious bigot... gregoire Jul 2012 #27
The judge is a religious bigot? No--the judge is enforcing the same rules every other msanthrope Jul 2012 #35
Nothing to do with military regulations? Really? n/t PavePusher Jul 2012 #36
Making everyone abide by the same rules is bigotry? NYC Liberal Jul 2012 #66
A common slam by those who believe curbing any religious or cultural expression riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #68
Yes, we can call out all the bigotry & batshit ideas NYC Liberal Jul 2012 #73
The other day I tried to carry my 15 ft stainless steel cross through airport security 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #75
A religious freak who slaughtered innocent people claiming to be a victim alphafemale Jul 2012 #34
Difficult logic for some folks here, apparently. n/t PavePusher Jul 2012 #38
I thought he was quadriplegic (???) cthulu2016 Jul 2012 #40
Paraplegic. nt msanthrope Jul 2012 #58
Help... Where am I??? procon Jul 2012 #42
I agree with the judge rollin74 Jul 2012 #43
He chose to join a cult. truthisfreedom Jul 2012 #47
This is petty,mean spirited bigotry mwrguy Jul 2012 #48
I agree with you and it should not happen.... gopiscrap Jul 2012 #49
He didn't have any trouble shaving before 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #57
And what you just said wasn't? PavePusher Jul 2012 #77
He knew the rules when he signed up and allowed Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #84
probably the greatest injustice in the world today arely staircase Jul 2012 #71
sorry but he is military JCMach1 Jul 2012 #79
Headline is designed for shock value JustABozoOnThisBus Jul 2012 #80
not much difference between him and the colorado joker may3rd Jul 2012 #81
His faith comes behind his duty. His body is Uncle Sams... ileus Jul 2012 #82
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Judge: Muslim suspect in ...»Reply #13