Jews, Muslims worry body scanners violate religious laws

Print More

Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content by logging-in here.

(RNS) Canadian lawyer Kerry Gearin is planning to fly to Washington, D.C., this summer for a conference on Islamic family law, but the full-body scanners being deployed in some U.S. airports make her wonder if she’ll be forced to leave her modesty at home. “When I saw the pictures, I thought, it’s too much information,” […]

  • V. V. Raman

    It would be appropriate for those deeply religious individuals (who in this context are more interested in following their ancient rules than in the safety and welfare of other passengers) to refrain from traveling to countries where their religious sensitivities are not respected.

    V. V. Raman

  • Marlin Grainer

    The author of this pathetic article should pay more attention to the news. He says, “screeners who view the images work in separate booths away from screening lines, and don’t see the passengers they scrutinize. All images are immediately deleted, and the machines have no ability to store images.”

    Who told him that lie? Recently a male Bollywood star went through the screeners at Heathrow and a bunch of women employees came running up to him, screen pictures of his naked body in hand, to ask him to autograph their printouts. This fact alone knocks down EVERYTHING the author contends. EVERYTHING. Persons of the opposite sex are watching. The images are obviously stored (duuuh – that’s a no-brainer in the digital computer world). Obviously, the screeners are not removed enough that they seem to know whose naked porn pictures they’re looking at. In fact, this article reads like a news release from TSA.

    I also have a problem with his contention that 98% of people prefer the x-ray scan. Now, granted, I realize that many people are pretty dumb and sheepish to boot, but I am 98% sure that 98% aren’t THAT stupid. Even if it weren’t for the issue of privacy, the issue of radiation most certainly worries more than 2% of the flying public. In order to get a full-body scan, you must undergo a full body x-ray – a totally unnecessary x-ray at that. X-rays do have health risks – including cancer. Furthermore the x-ray must be powerful enough to produce the desired image. Perhaps people who trust the government with their health and safety don’t mind, but I am reasonably sure its not 98%.

    Lastly, the scanners are put there not for anyone’s safety. The scanners are there because a few rich people are making a killing. If this government was so concerned about your safety, it would put comparable sums of money into plane inspection. If your plane should land in pieces against a mountain, there is a 99.999 probability that the cause was a loose bolt or worn-out gear that wasn’t replaced so the airline could save a few bucks. Lastly, in this day and age, no one has to commit suicide to take down a plane. Buying everything from surface-to-air missiles to nuclear bombs on the black market is very easy if you got the loot. No suicide necessary. They can take out a plane and be home in time for dinner.

  • It would be suitable for person’s intensely spiritual persons to desist from itinerant to countries where their spiritual sensitivities are not appreciated. Thanks!

  • It would be appropriate for person’s strongly sacred personnel to desist from peripatetic to countries where their devout sensitivities are not esteemed. Gratitude! 🙂