Lt. Col. Martha McSally wins fight against degrading Islamic garb!

Good going to the Rutherford Institute and Mr. Whitehead!

06/25/2002

Senate Votes 93-0 to Overturn U.S. Military Policy Requiring Servicewomen to Wear Muslim Garb

Washington, DC, On June 24, 2002, the U.S. Senate voted 93-0 in favor of an amendment to prohibit the Department of Defense from requiring or even formally urging servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia to wear the Muslim abaya, a black head-to-toe robe worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men. The amendment to the DoD Authorization Bill, S.A. 3969, which was sponsored by Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) and largely based on language drafted by attorneys for The Rutherford Institute, followed on the heels of a unanimous vote in the House of Representatives in May 2002. Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Mark Dayton (D-MN), Jack Reed (D-RI), Larry Craig (R-ID), Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) joined Smith in introducing the measure.

The Rutherford Institute brought the issue into the national spotlight when its attorneys filed suit in December 2001 on behalf of Lt. Col. Martha McSally, a decorated pilot with the U.S. Air Force, challenging a military policy requiring servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia to wear the abaya when off base. The suit, filed against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the U.S. Department of Defense, charged that the military's dress policy violates McSally's constitutional rights to equal protection and the freedoms of religion and speech. The Rutherford Institute, working in conjunction with McSally and leaders on Capitol Hill, sought to resolve the issue of the unconstitutional dress policy through judicial and legislative means. The final amendment passed by the Senate prevents any member of the Armed Forces or employee of the United States from requiring or encouraging that the abaya garment be worn and from retaliating against those who choose not to wear the abaya. The amendment also instructs the Secretary of Defense and those acting in his stead to provide each female member of the Armed Forces stationed in Saudi Arabia with information regarding the abaya prohibition. Finally, the amendment prohibits the use of federal funds for the procurement of abayas.

"The Senate vote is a great victory for freedom and the democratic process," said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "And because of Martha McSally's courageous stand, it is also a victory for the rights of women in the armed services."

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

05/15/2002

Rutherford Institute Attorneys Continue to Challenge Defense Department's Motion to Dismiss Fighter Pilot Lt. Col. Martha McSally's Lawsuit

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The U.S. House of Representatives voted unanimously in favor of a bill that would prohibit the Pentagon from requiring or even formally urging servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia to wear the Muslim abaya, a black head-to-toe robe worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men. "Christians like Lt. Col. Martha McSally should not be forced to wear a Muslim outfit, especially when off-duty and on their own time," Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.) said during the House debate. Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.), a seven-year Air Force veteran and co-sponsor of the bill, added, "The sad thing is that this bill is needed at all. This policy should never have been put in place."

Meanwhile, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute continue to challenge the Defense Department's attempt to dismiss Lt. Col. Martha McSally's lawsuit. McSally, a decorated pilot with the U.S. Air Force, filed suit in December 2001 to overturn the abaya policy, as well as other regulations requiring that a woman be accompanied by a man when off base and sit in the rear seat of any vehicle containing more than two passengers. McSally claims the policy violates her constitutional rights to equal protection and the freedoms of religion and speech. In filing its motion to dismiss McSally's lawsuit, the Department of Defense claims to have resolved the issue by changing the policy's language from "mandatory" to "strongly encouraged." But attorneys for The Rutherford Institute say that language still presents concerns about coercion of female military service personnel. Institute attorneys are also charging the Pentagon with retaliatory treatment toward McSally as a result of her opposition to these discriminatory policies. After she challenged the policies, Lt. Col. McSally's performance review was unfavorable for the first time in her military career, and her superiors refused to recommend her for a command position. Furthermore, Institute attorneys point out that the U.S. government continues to purchase and issue Muslim garb for American servicewomen, a clear violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.

"Now that the unanimous voice of the people, through their elected Congressional representatives, has been heard on this issue, it has become even more clear that the abaya policy is a violation of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution," said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute.

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

04/23/2002

Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute Defend Lt. Col. Martha McSally's
Right to Equal Protection and Freedom of Religion and Speech

WASHINGTON, In federal district court this Wednesday, April 24, 2002, at 10:00 a.m., EST, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute will challenge the Department of Defense's motion to dismiss Lt. Col. Martha McSally's lawsuit against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

McSally, a decorated pilot with the U.S. Air Force, filed suit in December 2001 to overturn a U.S. military policy that requires servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia, when traveling off-base, to wear the Muslim abaya, a black head-to-toe robe worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men. The policy also requires that a woman be accompanied by a man and sit in the rear seat of any vehicle containing more than two passengers. McSally claims the policy violates her constitutional rights to equal protection and the freedoms of religion and speech. Neither the U.S. State Department nor the government of Saudi Arabia requires American service members to wear traditional Muslim attire. In fact, the Saudis do not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya at all. And U.S. male service personnel in Saudi Arabia are prohibited from wearing traditional Muslim clothing while off base.

In filing its motion to dismiss McSally's lawsuit, the Department of Defense claims to have resolved the issue by changing the policy's language from "mandatory" to "strongly encouraged." But attorneys for The Rutherford Institute say that language still presents concerns about coercion of female military service personnel. Institute attorneys are also charging the Pentagon with retaliatory treatment toward McSally as a result of her opposition to these discriminatory policies. After she challenged the policies, Lt. Col. McSally's performance review was less than favorable for the first time in her military career, and her superiors refused to recommend her for a command position. Furthermore, Institute attorneys point out that the U.S. government continues to purchase and issue Muslim garb for American servicewomen, a clear violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.

"In military culture, 'strongly encouraged' is perceived as tantamount to a direct order, allowing the Department of Defense to continue its discriminatory policy under another name," said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "We are hopeful the Court will see past this charade and order the case to move forward."

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

03/01/2002

Institute Attorneys Plan to Proceed With Lawsuit, Charging That Certain Policies Remain Discriminatory and Retaliatory

WASHINGTON In filing a motion to dismiss Lt. Col. Martha McSally's lawsuit against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in federal district court yesterday, the Department of Defense has apparently conceded three of the four principal demands made by attorneys for The Rutherford Institute on behalf of Lt. Col. Martha McSally. McSally, a decorated pilot and commander with the U.S. Air Force, filed suit in December 2001 to overturn the U.S. military policies that she claims violates her constitutional rights to the freedoms of religion, speech and equal protection. DOD claims to have changed the policies that require servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia, when traveling off-base, to wear the Muslim abaya, be accompanied by a man, and sit in the rear seat of any vehicle containing more than two passengers.

Rutherford Institute attorneys have stated that the lawsuit is still moving forward, since the language requiring servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to wear the restrictive abaya when off-base has merely been changed from "mandatory" to "strongly encouraged" and still presents concerns about coercion of female military service personnel. Institute attorneys are also charging the Pentagon with retaliatory treatment toward McSally as a result of her opposition to these discriminatory policies. After challenging the policies, Lt. Col. McSally's performance review was less than favorable for the first time in her military career, and her superiors refused to recommend her for a command position. Furthermore, Institute attorneys point out that the U.S. government continues to purchase and issue the Muslim garb for American servicewomen, a clear violation of the Establishment Clause.

"While the Pentagon now claims it has mended its ways, it still adheres to discriminatory practices in Saudi Arabia," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "The lawsuit will continue because the crucial function of the court system is to be able to get to the truth, whether the military has, in fact, changed its policies and practices in recognition of the rights of servicewomen."

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

01/23/2002

Department of Defense Revises Unconstitutional Military Dress Policy
From "Mandatory" to "Strongly Encouraged"

WASHINGTON, In a memorandum order made public late yesterday, General Tommy Franks of the Department of Defense Central Command amended the language of a U.S. military policy that forces servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to wear restrictive Muslim garb, a black head-to-toe robe and head scarf called an abaya, when off base from "mandatory" to "strongly encouraged." The language comes in response to pressure brought about by The Rutherford Institute on behalf of Lt. Col. Martha McSally, a decorated pilot and commander with the U.S. Air Force who filed suit in December 2001 to overturn the policy that she claims violates her constitutional rights to the freedoms of religion, speech and equal protection. Neither the U.S. State Department nor the government of Saudi Arabia requires American service members to wear traditional Muslim attire for any reason. In fact, the Saudis do not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya at all. And male service personnel in Saudi Arabia are actually prohibited from wearing traditional Muslim clothing while off base.

Institute attorneys note that the lawsuit is still proceeding forward since the Department of Defense has not elaborated on their definition of "strongly encouraged" regarding the abaya policy nor made public whether any changes will be made in response to McSally's other charges, such as the fact that the policy requiring servicewomen to ride in the back of military vehicles also violates constitutional guarantees.

"I think the mountain has moved, but I don't know how far," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "We hope, however, that this will now mean that service people will not be forced to wear religious garb of other nations to which they may object."

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

01/18/2002

Lt. Col. Martha McSally to Appear on
CBS "60 Minutes" for In-Depth Interview With Correspondent Lesley Stahl

NEW YORK, Lt. Col. Martha McSally, the U.S. Air Force's highest ranking female fighter pilot, will tell CBS 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl about her attempt to overturn a U.S. military policy that forces servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia to wear the traditional Muslim abaya, a black head-to-toe robe worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men. McSally, with the help of The Rutherford Institute, has filed suit against the U.S. Secretary of Defense in federal court in an effort to have the policy declared unconstitutional. The CBS 60 Minutes segment on McSally will be broadcast on Sunday, January 20, at 7:00 p.m.(EST).

For a preview of Sunday's broadcast, go to the CBS 60 Minutes website at: http://www.cbsnews.com/now/section/0,1636,3415-412,00.shtml

As American politicians discuss strategies to liberate the women of Afghanistan from an oppressive and inhumane regime, McSally, a decorated U.S. Air Force commander and a devout Christian, is seeking to liberate American servicewomen in Saudi Arabia from a similarly restrictive U. S. military policy. In addition to having to wear the abaya when off base, the policy also requires servicewomen to ride in the back of military vehicles and forbids them from going off base unaccompanied by males. Neither the U.S. State Department nor the government of Saudi Arabia requires American service members to wear traditional Muslim attire for any reason. In fact, the Saudis do not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya at all. And male service personnel in Saudi Arabia are actually prohibited from wearing traditional Muslim clothing while off base.

"As many more Americans become aware of the military's discriminatory treatment of American servicewomen, we hope the Pentagon will take a hard look at the abaya policy and recognize it for what it is an unnecessary and indefensible example of excessive 'cultural sensitivity' that denies our national values of equality and respect for women," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute.

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

12/03/2001

Lawsuit Filed in Federal Court on Behalf of Lt. Col. Martha McSally

WASHINGTON, DC, As American politicians discuss strategies to liberate the women of Afghanistan from an oppressive and inhumane regime, the U.S. Air Force's highest ranking female fighter pilot is seeking to liberate American servicewomen from a U.S. military policy that forces servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to wear restrictive Muslim garb when off base.

Lt. Col. Martha McSally, a decorated commander with the U.S. Air Force, is seeking to overturn a U.S. military policy that forces servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to wear the traditional Muslim abaya, a black head-to-toe robe worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men. The policy also requires servicewomen to subordinate themselves and ride in the back of military vehicles and forbids them from going off base unaccompanied by males. John B. Williams, Esq., of the Washington law firm of Collier, Shannon and Scott, in cooperation with co-counsel and a team of attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have filed suit against the U.S. Secretary of Defense in federal court on behalf of McSally in an effort to have the policy declared unconstitutional. Neither the U.S. State Department nor the government of Saudi Arabia requires American service members to wear traditional Muslim attire for any reason. In fact, the Saudis do not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya at all. And male service personnel in Saudi Arabia are actually prohibited from wearing traditional Muslim clothing while off base.

"At the same time American military and political leaders are calling for the liberation of Muslim women in Afghanistan, the military has refused to end a policy that denies American servicewomen their basic human rights to be free from religious and gender discrimination," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "Through this lawsuit, Martha McSally is only asking for the same freedom that Afghan women liberated from Taliban rule would want, the right to decline to wear attire that symbolizes second-class status."

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

06/25/2001

Female Dress Code on Saudi Military Base Unconstitutional; Whitehead Urges President to Intervene

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. In a recent letter to the White House, John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, urged President Bush, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Air Force to reconsider a policy requiring female enlisted persons and officers who go off base to wear the traditional Muslim abaya whether on or off duty. The abaya is a black head-to-toe garment with a head covering worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men.

In speaking out against an unconstitutional and discriminatory violation of the equal protection and free exercise of religion rights of military women in Saudi Arabia, Whitehead and the Institute have lent support to Lt. Col. Martha McSally, the Air Force's highest ranking female pilot and decorated commander, who was required to wear the abaya when off base, which conflicts with her religious beliefs. The Joint Task Force facility in Saudi Arabia is enforcing the dress code and has imposed it on military women such as Lt. Col. McSally, despite the fact that neither the State Department nor the government of Saudi Arabia requires American service members to wear traditional attire for any reason. In fact, the Saudis do not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya at all. Furthermore, not only are male service personnel in Saudi Arabia not required to wear traditional Muslim clothing while off base, they are actually prohibited from doing so. Such unequal treatment of the sexes results in service women, regardless of their rank or command, being forced to wear religious clothing that is often unrelated to their own religious beliefs and renders them culturally subordinate to their male counterparts. Although asked for an explanation by numerous parties, the Joint Task Force has yet to provide the public with a rationale for such disparity in treatment.

"While respect for local customs is certainly an important principle for our armed forces to adhere to, it should not come at the price of reinforcing gender stereotypes that American law and culture long ago rejected," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "Moreover, as the experience of Lieutenant Colonel McSally and many other service women illustrates, this kind of disparate treatment strikes at the heart of the new military's policy of ensuring equality of opportunity for all service persons, male and female."
The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

01/18/2001

Decorated Female Fighter Pilot Speaks Out Against U. S. Military Policy Forcing American Servicewomen in Saudi Arabia to Wear Muslim Garb

NEW YORK, N.Y., Rutherford Institute president John W. Whitehead and Lt. Col. Martha McSally, the U.S. Air Force's highest ranking female fighter pilot, will discuss on national television McSally's attempt to overturn a U.S. military policy that forces servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia to wear the traditional Muslim abaya, a black head-to-toe robe worn in certain Muslim cultures and perceived as a sign of subordination to men. McSally and attorneys working with The Rutherford Institute have filed suit against the U.S. Secretary of Defense in federal court in an effort to have the policy declared unconstitutional. Whitehead and McSally will appear on ABC's "Good Morning America" on Wednesday, December 19, during the 7:00-8:00 a.m.(EST) segment of the show.

Ironically, as American politicians discuss strategies to liberate the women of Afghanistan from an oppressive and inhumane regime, McSally, a decorated U.S. Air Force commander and a devout Christian, is seeking to liberate American servicewomen in Saudi Arabia from a similarly restrictive
U. S. military policy. In addition to having to wear the abaya when off base, the policy also requires servicewomen to ride in the back of military vehicles and forbids them from going off base unaccompanied by males. Neither the U.S. State Department nor the government of Saudi Arabia requires American service members to wear traditional Muslim attire for any reason. In fact, the Saudis do not require non-Muslim women to wear the abaya at all. And male service personnel in Saudi Arabia are actually prohibited from wearing traditional Muslim clothing while off base.

"At the same time American military and political leaders are calling for the liberation of Muslim women in Afghanistan, the military has refused to end a policy that denies American servicewomen their basic human rights to be free from religious and gender discrimination," stated John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. "Through this lawsuit, Martha McSally is only asking for the same freedom that Afghan women liberated from Taliban rule would want, the right to decline to wear attire that symbolizes second-class status."

The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.

Copyright The Rutherford Institute.

Article archive

• Origin of the Koran
• Israel Storm: a warning from a Hindu
• Saudi Arabia Still Number 1 Terrorist State in 2008
• Lt. Col. Martha McSally wins fight against degrading Islamic garb!
• Muslim 'Palestinians' firebomb Christian 'Palestinians'
• Islam's Deadly Truth
• Islamic Bloc, Christian Right Team Up to Lobby U.N.
• Deism versus Islam
• At Least 7 Killed as Muslim Terrorists Bomb Jerusalem Campus
• Do I hate Islam and Muslims? It's about Sharia
• UNWORTHY OF TURKEY: Lessons from Iran's Easter parade of British hostages
• Ask Professor Esposito, NOI, and Racism
• Feds hold retired doctor under shrouded circumstances, controversy erupts.
• The Fight for Democracy in Iran and a salute to heroes.
• Congressmen Challenge 'Friendship' of Child-Stealing Saudis

Treating Muslims like adults: Say no to Islamofascism

Overview of Religion

Deism	Christianity	Judaism	Islam	Gnosticism	Unitarianism
Zoroastrianism	Pantheism	Fundamentalism	Evolution	Original Sin	Trinity
End Times	Apostle Paul	Apostle John	John Calvin	St. Augustine	Pelagius
Martin Luther	Real Jesus	Identity	Willie Martin	Royal Race	Pat Robertson

Also see New Age Religion and What is paganism?

[ Homepage ] Article List ] [ Another Article List ]