Mushroom
Gold Member
Uh, yeah, it means exactly that...lol.
No, it does not.
And directly to the military, Goldman v. Weinberger, which was a challenge of a Jewish serviceman wearing his yarmulke in uniform on duty. Quite specifically the court stated “review of military regulations challenged on First Amendment grounds is far more deferential than constitutional review of similar laws or regulations designed for civilian society” and that “to accomplish its mission, the military must foster instinctive obedience, unity, commitment, and esprit de corps.” And that the Air Force’s purpose in its dress regulations is uniformity, and it “reasonably and evenhandedly regulate dress in the interest of” that need. Thus, the First Amendment does not prohibit the Air Force from applying the challenged regulation to the wearing of a yarmulke by a soldier on duty and in uniform, even though that effectively restricts the wearing of headgear required by one’s religious beliefs.