One of the most upsetting moments, for me, in Star Trek, is in the episode ‘Ensign Ro’ (TNG, 5:3), when one of the most decent characters in Trek, William T. Riker, does something really terrible. He directs the eponymous Ensign to remove her Bajoran earring. As any watcher of DS9 knows, the earring is a religious accessory of profound spiritual significance, a mark of being part of the faith of the Prophets. Star Trek, of course, believes in IDIC—infinite diversity in infinite combinations. How could Riker be so terrible as to declare that, on the Enterprise, an ensign was not permitted to wear a religious item?
Now, out-of-universe, there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation: the writers and producers hadn’t yet made the earrings a religious object. When the episode was written, no one realised that later retcons would render Riker’s actions in such a terrible light. This, of course, is why Ensign Ro doesn’t say ‘But it’s a religious article’, which, we can hope, would have changed things.
However, Riker does indicate that he thinks wearing the earring is damaging to service discipline. Would that argument be enough to have the authority stop Ensign Ro (herself a notorious troublemaker) wearing a religious symbol? As law, we can be reasonably hopeful that the Federation’s protection for the religious liberty in Starfleet extend to allowing deviations for uniform regulations in light of religious sensitivities. The legal arguments for this are very strong, and were considered recently by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in the case of Singh v Berger.
This case dealt with the case of young men of the Sikh religion who, out of patriotism and informed by their Sikh values, desired to join the United States Marine Corps. As Sikhs, they sought to, during the course of their service, continue to follow normal religious practice of (among other things) maintaining unshorn hair and wearing a turban as well as wearing a special bracelet (kara) and carrying a purely ceremonial dagger (kirpan). The Marine Corps refused to accommodate these religious practices during boot camp, and would not admit the otherwise eligible recruits unless they would forsake their faith by shaving their hear and forgoing the required articles.
Ruling firmly against the Marine Corps, Judge Millet (giving the opinion of the Court) began by noting that both congress and the President had stated that diversity enhanced the strength of the armed forces in their ability to defend the country. The same must necessarily be true of Starfleet—diversity makes the Enterprise better able to accomplish its continuing mission. Indeed, the episode ‘Ensign Ro’ is quite literally about that point!
In that light, Judge Millett then analysed the balance of interests under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,1 His Honour noted that tattoos were allowed in the Marines, because they were common instances of individual distinction in society. Similarly, the Marines allowed beards for those with medical conditions which made shaving difficult or impossible. Though tattoos are less common in Starfleet (Chakotay doesn’t count given he was in the Maquis), the diversity of hairstyles and grooming (including beards, such as Riker’s) amongst the crew shows individual expression is widely tolerated, perhaps even encouraged in uniform. Unlike the Marine Corps, Starfleet is not an exclusively or, outside times of war, even primarily military organisation. Therefore, it is not surprising that it has a much greater latitude of individual grooming and presentment.
The question, then, was: why the line in the rules between acceptable and unacceptable was left at the point it excluded a minority faith practice? This applies just as much to Starfleet as the Marine Corps. Judge Millett wrote :
If the need to develop unit cohesion during recruit training can accommodate some external indicia of individuality, then whatever line is drawn cannot turn on whether those indicia are prevalent in society or instead reflect the faith practice of a minority.
This, to my mind, gets at the heart of the matter. We don’t know what the rules are for Starfleet uniform policies, but if they allow Worf to wear a Klingon sash, Troi to wear whatever those outfits were before ‘Chain of Command’, Riker to have a beard, all length and styles of hair, and just about every other welcome indication of individuality in grooming, the line cannot be exactly at a minority practice that seems strange or odd. In reality, of course, wearing an earring for religious purposes is not at all odd, and it doesn’t make sense that Riker would see it as such. Then again, in reality, surname-first name orders—like the Bajorans use—are extremely common—not least in East Asia, but also in Hungary and many other places—despite the episode treating it like a bizarre alien twist that name order is reversed. Oh well. Law can only fix so much.
Though the alleged discrimination in the case against religion did raise First Amendment issues, the US Constitution’s First Amendment does not itself stop neutral measures banning religious articles in uniform. Goldman v Weinberger 475 (1986) US 503.↩︎
No comments:
Post a Comment