IAF bans beards for muslims

[Prodigy17]

IAF cites religion to ban beard for Muslims

New Delhi: Defending an Indian Air Force policy that forbids Muslim personnel recruited after 2002 from keeping a beard, the Union Government has told the Supreme Court that its policies are “secular in nature” and that only those Air Force personnel are permitted to grow hair or keep a beard, “whose religion specifically prohibits” cutting hair. In Islam, it added, keeping a beard is not compulsory. “It is submitted that all Muslims do not keep a beard. The practice of growing and keeping beard is optional and sporting a beard is not universally recognised in the religion of Islam.”
The government’s response was to an appeal by Aircraftsman Ansari Aftab Ahmad, who challenged the validity of the IAF’s instructions, dated February 24 and April 1, 2003, prohibiting Muslim personnel from growing a beard. The court in September 2008 sought a scrutiny of the rule.
“The main aim of the policy, which lays down dress and department rules for the Air Force personnel, is that personnel should be known by the duty which he performs and not by the religion to which he belongs,” the Government told the apex court. The policy, the Air Force stressed, was “issued in the interest of cohesiveness in a combatant force like the IAF and also keeping in view the security implications.”

“All Air Force personnel, while on duty, are required to wear similar uniform and do not display any sign or object which marks him distinct from others. In an armed force, it is always intended that to the extent possible, all personnel should look identifiably similar so that they may work in a cohesive, co-operative and co-ordinate manner,” it said.

Apart from Ahmad, another petitioner, Mohammad Zubair, had challenged the Air Force policy on similar grounds. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan had earlier argued his case before the bench of Justices C K Thakker and D K Jain, saying that the rule impinged on the petitioner’s fundamental right to follow his religion, which makes it obligatory to grow a beard.
“This executive direction to the petitioner to shave off (his) beard is patently illegal, without any sanction or authority of law, besides being against the spirit of Article 25 of the Constitution and also against the secular ethos of the armed forces,” were the primary objections of Zubair, whose plea was dismissed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
IAF cites religion to ban beard for Muslims

Another feather in the cap for secular hidustan and its Kangaroo courts. Interesting thing is that the rules are bent to allow Sikhs to keep their beards but muslims are prohibited from keeping beard because it makes them security risk.....................

 

[Prodigy17]

Hey ahmedsid, what do you have to say about it man???????????????????????/

 

[AK-47]

In Islam, it added, keeping a beard is not compulsory. “It is submitted that all Muslims do not keep a beard. The practice of growing and keeping beard is optional and sporting a beard is not universally recognised in the religion of Islam.”

Beard is not required in Islam like in Sikhism. I dont see any issue with this.

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

In Islam, it added, keeping a beard is not compulsory. “It is submitted that all Muslims do not keep a beard. The practice of growing and keeping beard is optional and sporting a beard is not universally recognised in the religion of Islam.”

Beard is not required in Islam like in Sikhism. I dont see any issue with this.

Are you a Muslim?

 

[AK-47]

What difference does it make.

 

[Always Neutral]

Hey ahmedsid, what do you have to say about it man???????????????????????/

Hey Man you and the Indians here donot have a clue of what you are talking.

This problem originated from the British Armed Forces.

Beards are not compulsory for both sikhs and muslims as per their own religious laws.

People who join the Armed Forces have their fundamental rights curbed and they cannot join if they donot accept that. Since the joining is voluntary so people who join it must accept they must live by the rules.

Initially both sikhs and muslims were allowed beards provided that they would trim it as laid down in the Armed Forces Orders.

The Sikhs order further stipulated that the beard during duty and operational hours would be restrained by a thin stocking type band after it was gelled.

However after certain time some mis guided elements demanded that their beards be allowed to grow without trimming it in the fashion of the mullahs.

This was turned down and after a prolonged court battle and discussions with muslim scholars the court ruled that the Armed Forces have the right to change their beard rules.

20 years later history is repeating itself in India.

BTW Gen Kiyani and Gen M all don't have beards does that make them bad muslims ?

Beards inhibit gas mask intergrity.

Regards

Ps : This is just for info of people who want to learn not for young kids here who like to start Pakistan India flame wars

 

[Prodigy17]

In Islam, it added, keeping a beard is not compulsory. “It is submitted that all Muslims do not keep a beard. The practice of growing and keeping beard is optional and sporting a beard is not universally recognised in the religion of Islam.”

Beard is not required in Islam like in Sikhism. I dont see any issue with this.

So what is optional can be banned??????????????????? Tomorrow, your hindu secularists will say that since eating cow is not compulsory so muslims in india should not slaughter cow????????????????? Where will this stop?????

Just to brush up your memory, in a secular state, the government is supposedly neutral and does not favor one religious group over the other. So how come Sikhs are getting the favor and mulsims are not????? by the way, who has given authority to a military organization of hindu state to translate islam for its adherents??????????????? if it is not discrimination, then why people are going to courts?????????? this clearly shows that people are aggrieved..................... So, banning muslim signs is secularism in hindu india right???????????????????
Well done, great going secular and shining hidustan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

 

[Beskar]

Two words regarding this whole hoopla: Insecurities and Intimidation.

 

[zombie]

A lot of trolling on this thread.

 

[rajk20002002]

So what is optional can be banned??????????????????? Tomorrow, your hindu secularists will say that since eating cow is not compulsory so muslims in india should not slaughter cow????????????????? Where will this stop?????

Just to brush up your memory, in a secular state, the government is supposedly neutral and does not favor one religious group over the other. So how come Sikhs are getting the favor and mulsims are not????? by the way, who has given authority to a military organization of hindu state to translate islam for its adherents??????????????? if it is not discrimination, then why people are going to courts?????????? this clearly shows that people are aggrieved..................... So, banning muslim signs is secularism in hindu india right???????????????????
Well done, great going secular and shining hidustan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Armed forces and civil services are not same. Think for a moment, today a Muslim is allowed to have a beard, tomorrow a Hindu will come and ask for some funny symbol of some unknown god to be printed on his forehead...it will become a end less story. No body cares if the person is in civil services. I know many Muslim officers in civil services who keep beard and no one cares.

In India people very often go to court with controvercial cases to become famous as it attracts media attention. Its a very easy way of gaining public attention and at time even I think along those lines...LOL ..Think for a moment of a Muslim lady working as air hostess in air India. let us say some day she goes to court asking for the permission to wear Burka? How do you think air India will respond?

RK

 

[Prodigy17]

Hey Man you and the Indians here donot have a clue of what you are talking.

This problem originated from the British Armed Forces.

Beards are not compulsory for both sikhs and muslims as per their own religious laws.

People who join the Armed Forces have their fundamental rights curbed and they cannot join if they donot accept that. Since the joining is voluntary so people who join it must accept they must live by the rules.

Initially both sikhs and muslims were allowed beards provided that they would trim it as laid down in the Armed Forces Orders.

The Sikhs order further stipulated that the beard during duty and operational hours would be restrained by a thin stocking type band after it was gelled.

However after certain time some mis guided elements demanded that their beards be allowed to grow without trimming it in the fashion of the mullahs.

This was turned down and after a prolonged court battle and discussions with muslim scholars the court ruled that the Armed Forces have the right to change their beard rules.

20 years later history is repeating itself in India.

BTW Gen Kiyani and Gen M all don't have beards does that make them bad muslims ?

Beards inhibit gas mask intergrity.
Regards

Ps : This is just for info of people who want to learn not for young kids here who like to start Pakistan India flame wars

Hey, mr not so neutral, good logic but i'm not deceived. First, get rid of your intrinsic racial superiority complex about knowing everything. I know what i'm talking about and you dont have to show your inner diabolical inner racial superiority to prove a point instead come up with slightly more substantiated argument.

Second, no armed forces in the world are allowed to curb the fundamental rights of its soldiers, be very clear about it before making uncouth arguments. If that had been the case, no where in the world any soldier could go in civilian courts to fight their cases against their high commands. May be for racist britishers dont have any fundamental rights which was epitomized by your "prince" recently. Shame on your nation for being such low grade scums.

Third, under the british army, beard was to be strictly as per the authentic religious decrees and no whimsical or arbitary additions were allowed but it was never banned. In this case, the orgnization concerned has the gall to ban something which is important for a religion. An option, yes, but important one for practicing muslims. Any how, we will not take colonial racist to be trend setters for us in any sense so that discussion is useless.

Fourth, Gen kayani and mush dont have beards but they dare not and would not ban beards merely because they dont keep it............. its a matter of choice purely and beard puts no hinderance in the performing of duties that much i can guess.

Fifth, before you can display your megalomaniac tendencies by dismissing some one merely because of his age, allow me to tell you that you may be 50 years old but that would not under any criterion in the world make you wiser than even a teenager what to talk of adults. I'm sorry but your age has failed to mellow you enough........................... to participate in a debate by the strength of your argument instead of your age. What a shame!!!!!

 

[Beskar]

In India people very often go to court with controvercial cases to become famous as it attracts media attention. Its a very easy way of gaining public attention and at time even I think along those lines...LOL ..Think for a moment of a Muslim lady working as air hostess in air India. let us say some day she goes to court asking for the permission to wear Burka? How do you think air India will respond?

RK

I don't know about that, but they're firing all the "Fatties" of the airlines to sustain their "Commercial" image. Prime example of ignorance.

Air India fires air hostesses for being too fat to fly -Times Online

 

[Prodigy17]

Think for a moment, today a Muslim is allowed to have a beard, tomorrow a Hindu will come and ask for some funny symbol of some unknown god to be printed on his forehead...it will become a end less story. No body cares if the person is in civil services. I know many Muslim officers in civil services who keep beard and no one cares

I think, hindus have sufficient sholars to prove or disprove what is an authentic religious symbol of hinduism so they should not impose their worries on some other religion on the pretext of their own religious problems????????/ what about appeasing Sikhs, if no one with beard can join IAF then why doesn't IAF apply the same rule for Sikhs by not recruiting them in the first place?????????? or is it that Sikhs are too hot to handle and muslims in india subservient enough to impose things on them. By the way beard is not a funny religious symbol in islam????????? just because the white has discarded beard from his fashion trend, doesn't mean that we have to jump the band wagon. Can you narrate one reason how, beard stops a person from performing his duty whether civilian or military.
The example given by you is extraneous.

 

[rajk20002002]

I don't know about that, but they're firing all the "Fatties" of the airlines to sustain their "Commercial" image. Prime example of ignorance.

Air India fires air hostesses for being too fat to fly -Times Online

I see nothing wrong in that. I see many fat belly policemen also who should be given time to be fit or else fired. If certain jobs need some physical standards, its important to force them.

RK

 

[Communist]

This is again hindu india's zionist hinduist kautilyan diplomatic attempt to keep Muslims under psychological pressure and also pave the way thereby to hinduize (culturally) the Muslims gradually. It has been designed to make the distance between a Muslim and his path of belief, Islam and thus the hindu zionist forces are deliberately sandwiching the Muslims, who are a minority and face the hostility of hindu majority in everywhere, so that Muslims can feel a sense of insecurity in them and also get victimized by the politics of fear, a fear from the mighty zionist hinduist fascist forces as afr as the defence related service is concerned. In other spheres, Muslims are always discriminated in other ways. Thus a deliberate attempt to discriminate has a psychological impact. Indeed, zionist hindus want to make the Muslims feel that they are discriminated because they are the minority.