comment: >
  
  A Viking individual? Is this the 800s?
context: From article:
  
  Three Sikh men sought an exemption from a Marines grooming rule requiring them to shave their beards, with the men arguing it was their expression of commitment to their religious faith. They won.   
  The court said allowing them to do so would have no impact on their duties. The US Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard all accommodate the religious requirements of Sikhism. >
  
  If it doesn’t impact duties why don’t they remove the rule entirely? >
  
  Per the article 
  
  Marine Leadership argued that uniformity was critical to "team mentality," saying recruits were required to follow “the same set of regimented practices" to build cohesion. 
  The Marines argued that recruits needed to be "stripped of their individuality" as part of a "psychological transformation" toward shared sacrifice, the court document read.
  
  I think the uniform requirements were set up in the 1970s from some basic looking up uniform policies for the US Army and Marines, prior to that the established uniform wasn't as strict, however. So some of these policies are only about 50 years old and malleable. >
  
  My high school social studies teacher was a WWII and Korean War vet from Yuba City California, and he'd been allowed to keep his turban and Kirpan when he enlisted in 1943. From what he said I believe the religious exemptions for Sikh articles of faith were removed in the early '80s. Sikhs have served in the US military starting in WWI, and have served in every conflict since. Sikhs had a high rate of service until the changes in the '80s, but rarely serve now because of the restrictions. >
  
  I believe the Army rolled back some of the restrictions before or around 2010 so a Sikh (as well as Muslim or Viking) individual can fill out an ~~AR600-20~~ AR670-1 waiver to keep their hair (I think? I forgot the actual form, if anyone knows and can remind me that'd be appreciated).