comment: >
  
  A big badass beard, or a big bad ass beard?
  The distinction is important here.
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). >
  
  A Viking individual? Is this the 800s? >
  
  There are still some practitioners of Norse Pagan beliefs and they're around, and apparently referred to as Heathens if this article is to reliable. >
  
  Not still. There is no unbroken continued worship of the Norse religion to this day. Most of the practices of that faith are entirely unknown and lost to time. Although people like Snorri Sturluson saw value in preserving mythological content, there's very little in way of describing religious practices like prayers.
  The Norse pagan revivalism is a mix of conjecture based on Snorri's and Adam of Bremen's writings, Tacitus's Germania and Ibn Fadlan's encounter with the Kievan Rus. That, and a bunch of Unverified Personal Gnosis where they sort of wing it, sometimes based on what cool stuff they've seen in Viking movies and video games. 
  It is for all intent and purposes a wholly modern religion based on modern ideas of what we would've liked the religion to be. >
  
  
  It is for all intent and purposes a wholly modern religion based on modern ideas of what we would've liked the religion to be.
  
  Isn't that true for all religions? I'm sure they all changed over time. The pope tolerating homosexuality is just one example. >
  
  Yeah, but the Catholic Church really has been one (mostly) unbroken chain of consistently held hierarchical power for 2,000 year with a billion+ followers today. So there’s more of a through line >
  
  Soo no more policing up those moostaches!? >
  
  Yous got to maintain Marine Corps grooming standurds! >
  
  Shave profile has been relaxed for years. I’m surprised this is even an issue. >
  
  Do SNCOs not appear from the ether to bitch at you for entering the exchange with a 5:00 shadow on a Saturday anymore? >
  
  Been out a few years and I'm always worried Gunny is hiding behind the shopping carts ready to jump out at me if I don't shave when I enter the supermarket. >
  
  God himself can't save you if you're wearing a white undershirt too. >
  
  … are you not allowed to wear white undershirts? >
  
  Not like a plain white t-shirt and jeans, no. But, if you have a pocket on it, then you're cool because it's no longer an undershirt. >
  
  If it's like that, what if you wear two of them? Undershirt is now overshirt. >
  
  If there's anything they like best, it's being a smart ass to skirt the rules >
  
  Don't blame be me, pockets started it. >
  
  The UK Armed Forces have a long tradition of Sikhs serving, dating back to colonial days where they would make up entire Regiments. They have always been permitted to retain their beards. And their uniforms have always been allowed to be modified to replace the beret with a turban. >
  
  Same in Canada. We have Sikh mounties with beards and turbans instead of the famous hats. >
  
  I really hope this eventually leads to a return of civil war era facial hair in the military. >
  
  I want US president with big bad ass beard