Social Question

Cruiser's avatar

A Muslim woman refuse body scan, should they get a pass or be denied boarding the flight?

Asked by Cruiser (34984 points ) March 4th, 2010

A Muslim woman was barred from boarding a flight after she refused to undergo a full body scan for religious reasons and her companion another Muslim woman cited medical reasons. They both forfeited their tickets. Should there be exceptions of body scans for these religious or medical reasons and given a pass? Does their Muslim background make this any more of an issue?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7048576.ece

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

118 Answers

syz's avatar

Being Muslim shouldn’t have anything to do with it. Anyone who refuses a scan should be prevented from boarding if those are the rules. I assume that there is an alternative option for those with medical exceptions – were they offered that as an alternative?

CMaz's avatar

Then she has to get on the longer line for a physical search.

ucme's avatar

Rules are rules regardless.

Cruiser's avatar

@ChazMaz I find it odd that they just forfeited their tickets and left.???

CMaz's avatar

“They both forfeited their tickets.”

Problem solved. Hope the door did not hit them on their way out.

janbb's avatar

While I am usually in favor of the freedom to practice one’s religion, I think the only effective way to uitilize full body scans as a security measure is if anyone requested to has to do it. Perhaps an alternative physical exam could be offered. I don’t think what religion it is should have anything to do with the issue.

noyesa's avatar

Are you suggesting that they should be allowed on the plane sans search for “religious reasons”? Last time I checked, I can’t walk onto a plane with a briefcase full of explosives. I wonder if the security guard would be more forgiving if I told him that I don’t play by his rules and he should respect my right to do so (by letting me on the plane).

This isn’t an issue of religion, it’s a matter of screening people before letting them onto a plane.

HTDC's avatar

I think denying her the flight was the right thing to do. Playing the religion card, should not give you special treatment or advantages, over those not belonging to a religion. There certainly should not be “exceptions”, it wouldn’t be fair to the rest of us complying with the rules.

Just_some_guy's avatar

I think that if it is somehow against their religion then they need to find another way to travel. You cannot let one person go because of their religion or you would have to let everyone go. If i didn’t want a scan I’d just say I’m a Muslim if they didn’t get scanned. All the usefulness of scanning would be gone. It is their right to not be scanned, but it is the right of every other person flying to feel secure because of the security measures in place. So my point is Muslim or any other person who will not be scanned can find another mode of travel that does not require scanning, or just not go were they were going.

kevbo's avatar

England seems to be turning into a fucked up place when it comes to surveillance and photography. See even the list of stories below the main story.

Cruiser's avatar

@kevbo I have a friend in the FBI who confirmed most if not all of these instances are probes of airport security measures. He said people would freak if they actually knew the number of attempts that do occur.

Captain_Fantasy's avatar

Why don’t I get to refuse then?
Do we all need to convert to Islam to get the government out of our pants?

noyesa's avatar

@Captain_Fantasy No no, clearly this is an issue of profiling. It’s because they’re from the middle east. The only reason I (21 year old white male from the midwest) got screened was because the security officer thought I was cute. It’s not like everyone can get searched.

lucillelucillelucille's avatar

No.Airlines are private companies and can make their own rules.Read your ticket.The airlines are not a giant social experiment.It is a business that is striving to keep their customers safe.

Judi's avatar

I haven’t read all the posts, but if she had the option of having a female scan reader then I think it’s fair to revoke her right to go further.

Bagardbilla's avatar

Their being Muslim should not exempt them, however they should have been offered an alternative. There are many modest people who may not necessarly wish to be “scaned” for various reasons, especially since…“The X-ray machines… also afford clear outlines of passengers’ genitals.”

judochop's avatar

Airline security and flying is a privilage not a right. Your religion has nothing to do with preflight security. Stay home if you don’t like it. This world has become so soft and pc that we’ve endangered ourselves. I’ve had to be scanned before and I’ve had my bags searched to. This is the world we live in now. If you don’t like it then please don’t fly.

kevbo's avatar

@Cruiser, I appreciate that perspective. Thanks.

evil2's avatar

i think that they should be able to refuse, and opt for a physical exam by a person of the same sex….that would be fair . i think that muslim bashing has become fashionable and will not take part in it, its their belief let them have it as long as everyone else is still protected..

Lve's avatar

It was my understanding that people who don’t want to go through the body scan have the option of a physical exam? (although I am not sure which method makes you feel more uncomfortable: an anonymous body scan or some security person feeling you up…)
If you refuse either option, you are not flying.

Your_Majesty's avatar

I live in Islamic country so I would say that’s just their deliberate excuse. I know that Islam has many root/branch in their religion. The one in my country is a bit better and allowed women for that kind of scan. From what I heard that two woman you’ve described might come from Arabian root that married/adult women must wear black dresses and ‘jilbab’ to cover all their body parts except their eyes. It’s for holiness reason,to keep their beautiful aura or to preserve their virginity aura(for unmarried women),only their own husband that can be allowed to see their inner body parts.

But for safety reason I suggest that they must go through body scan to prevent terrorism,but with permission from their father or husband first in the respect for Islam.

Seek's avatar

Hey, I’m not into the idea of my naked self being photographed by some airline for any reason.

Makes me glad I very rarely ever board a plane (the last time was my honeymoon in ‘07, and the security then was annoying enough at Chicago O’Hare)

If they felt comfortable giving up their tickets, their travel plans must not have been that important. I do think, however, there should be some sort of alternative. I remember being wand-scanned when I was “lucky number 13”. Do they still do that?

As long as there’s a way around the “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (who happens to be studying your nude body)”, I’m happy.

Blackberry's avatar

Fuck that, they get scanned like everyone else.

Cruiser's avatar

@Lve According to what I read in the article the UK authorities have it where no scan…no flight…no exceptions but for the Pope.

CaptainHarley's avatar

This SHOULD be a no-brainer, if it weren’t for political correctness mindlessness having turned some minds to mush. No scan, no board… period.

Dr_Dredd's avatar

I think there should be an alternative available. Especially for medical reasons—if I have a pacemaker, there’s no way I’m going through one of those things until I know FOR SURE it won’t hurt me. But even for personal objections, I think there should be another alternative, such as a physical search.

Although I can’t imagine a Muslim woman liking that one, either.

dpworkin's avatar

Fuckin terrorist muslin bastards. Shoot ‘em indiscriminately. This is a free country, so why don’t they go back where they came from?

noyesa's avatar

@dpworkin Ahh, tongue in cheek humor exposes stupidity better than almost anything.

janbb's avatar

Trust @dpworkin for the well-thought out most nuanced answer!

CaptainHarley's avatar

Rolls eyes @dpworkin.

Sometimes I wonder about you! Heh!

Trillian's avatar

@evil2 and @Bagardbilla who do you suggest pay for keeping people on staff or other alternate methods of surveillance? How do the costs get defrayed? Higher priced tickets? Allow me to paraphrase @jeruba from another thread; “Flying is not a right. If you don’t like the restrictions, find another method of travel.”

galileogirl's avatar

Every govt reg will meet with reasonable exceptions. There should be a female security person who can do a physical exam-they’ve been doing that for 9 years. If that takes add’l time and the passenger misses her flight, oh well.

The “infection” excuse is unreasonable. If she is infectious, don’t put her on a plane and make 100 other people sick.

There has to be room for exceptions. If you are taking a driving test you might fail if you don’t keep 2 hands on the wheel. If that is a hard and fast rule does that mean people without 2 working hands cannot drive? Think reasonable accommodations.

LKidKyle1985's avatar

Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the influence that these full body scans that shows everyone how gigantic my penis is was a bit of an invasion of privacy. Now, I know this is the UK and not the States but theres still something about the human nature that doesn’t want some pervy brit guy looking at my goods. I wonder what influence them being muslim has on all of your answers. If it was a rich white businessman maybe people would be taking a different stance. Besides there should be alternatives to the body scan like others have said that have been around for years and doesn’t hamper the system that much.

CaptainHarley's avatar

@LKidKyle1985

One passenger, one scan… period! : D

Cruiser's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 I would think that if you were under the influence you wouldn’t mind these scans at all. For me it’s the thought of the Jumbo Tron in the baggage handlers break room showing these scans that puts me off.

ucme's avatar

@dpworkin In English we are spelling it thus, Muslim.As far as i’m aware the “n” is silent.

escapedone7's avatar

I won’t do it and it has nothing to do with religion. This is why I take Amtrak and rental cars. I agree just using the word Muslim put everyone here into a blather. If it were someone simply standing up for their bellief it was a privacy invasion, and happened to be a rich white aristocrat, you’d all be clapping your little hands. I am tired of people giving up their rights out of fear.

Just_some_guy's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 most people I know like rich white businessmen a lot less than Muslims.

Just to add to the point it isn’t invasion of privacy because you don’t have to fly. So long as it is random I agree with this type of precaution. If they come to your home and scan you and give no choice then down with the establishment! and all that.

Seek's avatar

@Just_some_guy

But think about how the news article would have been written if the passenger were a rich, white businessman!

“Airline denies passenger flight after refusing an alternative to demeaning nude photography – story at 11!”

LKidKyle1985's avatar

@Cruiser im not sure where you got the being drunk thing from, but i agree with the back room jumbo tron.
@Just_some_guy Really? I’ve been on elevators where lots of rich white guys have got on and got off without anyone saying anything. But when a clearly muslim person has stepped off the elevator I’ve heard lots of times where people start talking about them and how glad they were they got off the elevator, or something to that effect. Or make a comment about how they were glad they didn’t blow them up. I never heard anyone say something like Wow im glad that rich white guy didn’t try pulling a Ponzi scheme on me!

My point is theres clearly a racist undertone to anytime a muslim person is involved in some kind of airport security ruse.

dpworkin's avatar

@ucme Should you ever become more sophisticated, you will begin to learn about a convention we call “humor”. I see that it escapes you now. Perhaps one day you will catch up.

ucme's avatar

@dpworkin Yeah fucking hilarious.Well more like smile humour,kind of similar to baby talk.

Just_some_guy's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 I agree with the undertone and @Seek_Kolinahr I agree with this also.
I still think overall any person who wants to fly should expect this. I feel for people who are treated bad because of who they are. I do not know a single Muslim so it is easy for me to feel like “Muslims are bad because they blow stuff up.” I do not feel that way. Just because people discriminate against you doesn’t mean it is ok for you to be able to put others in a dangerous situation.

LKidKyle1985's avatar

@cruiser oh i get it now. Your right if i was drunk id be like wooot lol

Cruiser's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 I thoughtfully cherry picked this statement of your….
“but I was under the influence”

LKidKyle1985's avatar

Just to conclude things, I don’t really like these body scan machines in general anyways. I do feel like they are an invasion of privacy and I don’t think the argument “if you want to fly then you need to submit to this” is an acceptable cop out. The airline industry flew without incident for decades and all of a sudden some crazy asshole tried blowing his nuts off and now theres this huge push for body scanners. Its a shame that a handful of muslim extremist can strip so many rights from us (im not just talking about body scanners). I am not really sure where the logic is in the support for more government oversight and intrusion into our lives as if there isn’t already too much.

dpworkin's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 Have you ever read Calvin Trillan’s theory about this? He surmises that there is a fellow called Achmed the Droll who told his pals he could make us all take off our shoes at the airport, and when that worked, he said, watch me make them get naked.

Cruiser's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 How quickly we forget the thousands who have lost their lives to terrorists sneaking crap onto airline flights. I was in a plane at 8 am my time on 9/11 and would gladly take off all my clothes if it meant a chance I would never have to relive the terror of that day.

MissAnthrope's avatar

I respect people’s religious views even if I, myself, don’t agree with them. So, I’m all for religious freedom and getting a pass from some things due to religious views.

However, when it comes to the safety of large numbers of people, and the activity is a largely voluntary one, I think everyone should have to play by the rules. For me, it has nothing to do with the particular religion. If they allow people to get through airport security with minimal screening based on religious views, that is opening up a huuuge can of worms and that’s pretty scary.

LKidKyle1985's avatar

@Cruiser I didn’t forget, but do you really believe a body scan would have stopped that attack? There was a failure in the system much higher up than that on that particular day.

Dr_Dredd's avatar

@Cruiser I don’t think anyone has forgotten 9/11. Frankly, that comment is uncalled for. You don’t know how many people on Fluther lost friends or family.

Like @LKidKyle1985, I question whether body scans are the answer to the “terrorists smuggling things on planes” problem. For the underwear bomber, they had intelligence that he was planning something! Let’s find out what went wrong there before we start bombarding people with x-rays.

philosopher's avatar

If you refuse to be scanned you should not be able to board.
It does not really matter that she Muslin.
If she has nothing to hide.She should comprehend the scope of the situation.
No one likes being scanned.
We have to attempt to make the flying Public as safe as possible.No one is above the rules.
In addition this is just the type of thing the terrorist would attempt. Anyone dumb enough to side with them is a total moron.
They have used pregnant Suicide Bombers before.

Bagardbilla's avatar

@Trillian I suggest they get a non-paid lesbian security officer to do body searches. :). It’ll be a win-win.
No seriously, there usually are additional security officers around in case of downed machines. If not, charge them extra! That’ll make em question the depth of their beliefs.
btw no offense to lesbians, because I’d gladly volenteer to search women, but they wouldn’t have me… as a man… you know?

Cruiser's avatar

@Dr_Dredd The Xmas bomber debacle was exactly a direct result of people forgetting and getting careless and lackadaisical over airport screening. I am all for maxing out our efforts to screen everyone. Look at Israel they have more reason than any other country to screen for terrorists and they have the strictest screening process of any country and they have had zero problems in almost 10 years plus nobody there gripes about it either.

thriftymaid's avatar

Scan or stay on the ground.

Dr_Dredd's avatar

@Cruiser I’d agree only in that it was the agencies responsible for sharing intelligence that got careless and lackadaisical (or maybe they started out that way).

Cruiser's avatar

@Dr_Dredd I fly 2–3 times a year and the security after 9/11 was overdone and then settled in to a fairly decent program but last year it was much more loose and relaxed up until Xmas bomber boy. I just wish they would set a protocol like Israel’s and leave it.

Captain_Fantasy's avatar

The people who are responsible for the safety in American airports are some of the least trained and lowest paid in the world for their profession. Even if US air travel is suffering financially, security is not an area to cut corners. I don’t put much faith in the professionalism or the effectiveness or US airport security. I’ve seen greater security at night clubs.There have been security people caught sleeping at their stations before.
Go to some European nations and you’ll see their security is not to be messed with.

Factotum's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 I’ve never been on an elevator where people said anything about Muslims. It occurs to me though that if you’re going to get blown up it’s statistically most likely going to be by a Muslim (which is a creed, not a race btw).

@escapedone7 Were a ‘rich white aristocrat’ to object to the screening on the grounds that he was special no one would be applauding. We hate that kind of thinking. As it happens I am against the scans but no one is served by making some people immune to them especially faceless Muslims in big, flowy head-to-toe garments.

Symbeline's avatar

Fuck religion. Follow the rules like everyone else. And being Muslim should have nothing to with it, wherever you come form. But rules should be followed by everyone.

Medical reasons? I’d tolerate that, but another different method to scan should be used, regardless.

Now SPREAD EM. lawl

Val123's avatar

Hail no!
“I refuse the scan on religious grounds!”
“OK. Go on through.”
30 minutes later the lady pulls a sub machine gun out of her berka. Every terrorist in the world would be using that excuse to get on the plane!

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

Everyone, regardless of race, religion, health or pet preference should have a choice between a body scan and a strip search if they want to board a plane. Otherwise, they must be turned away,.

stranger_in_a_strange_land's avatar

No. Same rules for everyone. Being a Rastafarian doesn’t give you the right to possess cannibis. Refuse the scan, be escorted off the airport property.

philosopher's avatar

@stranger_in_a_strange_land
I heard they are going to ofter a pact down as an alternative.
I agree with you.

missingbite's avatar

@Captain_Fantasy TSA is a government body. They are government employees. Their training is done by out government. It won’t matter if the airlines are losing money or not. The system is not set up to depend on the airlines so they have no way to “cut corners” on security.

escapedone7's avatar

@stranger_in_a_strange_land and if it was your 13 year old that had to be scanned (show their body to security) you would not feel this is wrong? You see, eventually this will impact the rights to privacy in a lot of other matters. It is a slippery slope. I also do not believe it would have prevented 9–11. They hijacked the planes without dynamite or machine guns. I think they used simple box cutters, but could probably have broken a metal handle off a suitcase and had a similar weapon.

I think it is selling out rights to privacy for a completely false sense of security.

Just_some_guy's avatar

I was never on a plane and don’t plan on it. Lets ban planes.

janbb's avatar

You don’t think there aren’t other ways for terrorists to atttack?

escapedone7's avatar

@janbb sure there are many ways they can attack. I am not going to live in fear though. I also refuse to give up my rights. I will consent to chemical sniffing dogs, x ray machines and armed guards on the planes, even consent to paying more for said armed guards. I will not consent to be body scanned as it is a virtual strip search. And I choose to not take a plane. People like me will keep Amtrak in business. If all passengers felt the same way though, the drop in profit might convince them. Since most people agree with the scans, the flights will continue… without me on them.

mrrich724's avatar

When it comes to safety, no exceptions. She does the scan, or she doesn’t board.

On top of that, if it IS racial profiling, it doesn’t matter. B/C at the end of the day, what is a greater tragedy, profiling or a plane killing hundreds or (as in the past) thousands of lives?

CaptainHarley's avatar

@mrrich724

Excellent answer.

janbb's avatar

@escapedone7 Nor am I. My comment wasn’t directed at you. But I do find it ironic that we focus most of our security attention on planes and seemingly ignore other threats.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

@janbb Even small country planes seem to be ignored. Almost every major city in the world has a large train network with almost no security, and that has proven to be just as devastating as planes in London. It really is worrying that security is so misplaced. In my city security guards at train stations are generally dim-witted anyway.
Security measures on international flights do seem to be overdone, but the principle remains that religion, culture etc should not exclude anyone from security.

filmfann's avatar

We should only scan people who don’t protest, right?
If they don’t want to be scanned, let them on.

It really sounds like this all worked out.

ChaosCross's avatar

Regardless of their religious conviction, if they cannot accept a scan then they should not be on the flight.

Jeruba's avatar

Religion does not require anyone to fly on an airplane.

Prohibiting someone from flying does not interfere with freedom of religion. It interferes with freedom of flying.

The safety regulations are there to prevent someone from interfering with others’ freedom of living.

judochop's avatar

Why is everyone bashing @dpworkin ? If you’ve been on this site longer than five minutes then you would know he was mimicking the rednecks that think like that. Jesus, have we all grown so soft and P.C. that a joke, made in good taste or bad is not grounds for bashing someone? Grow the fuck up or get the fuck out, really….OK enough of my ranting.. Like I said before, it is a policy and if that policy violates your religion then don’t fly in the plane. It is not an issue at all, it is a policy. The issue is cut and dry and fairly simple. Sure, opt for the physical exam, which would be much more violating and take a lot more time….?

Violet's avatar

Sucks for her, she can take a boat.
Also, that is really suspicious of those 2 women. Of all the millions of muslin women who have flown, it’s now a problem? “The second female passenger was said to be concerned because she had an infection”!That’s such a load of bullshit!

Just_some_guy's avatar

I might be a redneck. As much as I think it sucks to have to be scanned tho I am not exactly sure whats involved. “Big Brother comes to mind.” If it is now normal to be scanned everyone who wants to fly should accept it. Face it flying is the fastest way to move from one place to another over long distance. That makes it the fastest way to move Drugs, weapons, bombs, dirty material, and other unseemly things. I would much rather people be searched in some way even if only a percentage were checked. Most importantly when someone is going from one country to another. I highly doubt a terrorist attack would happen were I live. Not enough people to target, but I don’t want people in any place to have to live with another attack. Since it is basically impossible to stop violence and hatred and terrorism we must have some precaution in place. Maybe this scanning is not the way, but for now it is. As for the train I am in the US and nowhere near a border. Canada would be closest. I imagine there are trains that cross the border tho I have no idea the safety precautions taken with these.

Better safe than sorry.

Jeruba's avatar

It also occurs to me that a woman so well covered that only her eyes show might be a man.

LKidKyle1985's avatar

I feel like a lot of people are forgetting that there are other ways to reveal concealed weapons/bombs carried on a person than by a machine that takes nudie photos of you. They have been doing it for years. I don’t think anyone is saying hey its your religious belief sure get on the plane without any inspection! Thats ridiculous. Why did planes get blown up and crashed before? Not because of a lack of body scanners, it was a failure of the intelligence community to act on information they had. They knew about the christmas bomber, they knew something was up with the shoe bomber, and they new shit was up on 9/11.
@Factotum I suppose since you have never been on an elevator where people made bigoted comments about someone aimed toward their religion and race then I suppose bigotry toward Muslims is something I made up , thanks for the perspective. And btw I am fully aware of the difference between creed and race and in addition nationality.

galileogirl's avatar

Remember the Spanish train bombings (2004) and the London bus bombings (2005) and the Tokyo subway poison gassings (1995). We are never going to be 100% safe no matter how much privacy and rights we give up. The terrorists don’t expect to take over our country. They win if they make our govt as repressive as theirs.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 The point is no one should have any choice when it comes to which security measures they will be subject to. What is the point of the scanners if every person can opt out and be subjected to the old methods? Only innocent people would ever be subjected to the new scans, in which case they are totally useless.

Factotum's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 Of course Muslims are sometimes subjected to bigotry. As are so many, many sub-groups of the human race.

stranger_in_a_strange_land's avatar

@escapedone7 Yes, the loss of privacy offends me; but as long as everyone is equally subjected to it, I accept it. I voluntarily gave up many of my privacy rights in 29 years of military service, so that probably skews my opinion a bit.

I do agree with you that these body scans add little to actual security. It would be far better to have good explosive and firearms detection, armed guards in the passenger compartment and cockpits sealed off from the passenger compartment. Any attempt at highjacking and the flight crew should be obligated to land the aircraft at the nearest airport regardless of any threats the attempting highjacker might make. Requiring them to switch off communication with the passenger compartment would also be a good idea. At least this way, a commercial airliner could never be used as on 9/11.

philosopher's avatar

@mrrich724
I agree with you.
Common sense says you are right. Those who do not see the logic beyond your words clearly lack common sense. They can twist logic to suit their bias; but only an idiotic would listen to them.
Israel profiles and every democracy should to keep their people safe.
The Republicans R wingers may go too far on many issues but not on this one. The left wing would have us placate them. They would prefer more Americans die.
I am an Independent my decisions are based on the facts and not emotional bias.
I feel sorry for the people killed in 911. I do not feel an once of sympathy for terrorist or their families. Barbarians should be forbidden to live in our society.
Living in a democracy is a privilege not a right. They can live in Iran or other nations that support their evil immoral ways. They do not want them either. They use them to hurt us.
Yes I despise them and their sympathizer; and I could not care less what they think of me. They are what holds human society back. They are more like cavemen then human. Money spent on stoping them should be used to enrich human life.

Seek's avatar

Am I the only one that objects to body scans on the grounds of not wanting to be photographed naked by government agents?

I’m not terribly modest, but I think I have the right to decide who sees me naked and when.

philosopher's avatar

@Seek_Kolinahr
Don’t fly. Everyone that flies that must deal with this. No one is exempt.
Yes our rights are being questioned. Unfortunately human life is more important.
Take a bus or train. I think scanning may become the norm for trains and buses too. These barbarians will attack us any place; because l our freedom is a threat to their fascist beliefs.
They are mentally ill people; brain washed by their mentors. All they know is hate. We are their scape ghosts.

Seek's avatar

@philosopher

Is there any evidence to suggest that nude photography makes us any more safe than less-intrusive measures?

And I’d love to know how I can get a train to Australia. Not that I’m planning on going to Australia, but I’d like the option to be open.

The barbaric thing is the government forcing strip-searches on every citizen for no good reason. Honestly, ten years ago a person would have called you crazy if you suggested that today we’d be getting naked for strangers before boarding an airplane.

escapedone7's avatar

What freedoms are we fighting for if we are going to give them up so easily?

philosopher's avatar

@Seek_Kolinahr
You have a choice to fly or not fly.
Nothing is hundred percent affective.

Just_some_guy's avatar

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/12/30/airline.terror.scanners/index I don’t know about you all but that picture really doesn’t turn me on. If you find a better picture to show please do.

evil2's avatar

its amazning what liberties we are willing to give up in the face of fear . hate truly is a powerful weapon….marshall law here we come

Just_some_guy's avatar

@evil2 It isn’t fear. Most of our rights are given up by laziness. In my opinion flying isn’t a right.

evil2's avatar

@Just_some_guy ya but being singled out by your appearance or faith is definately a breech of those rights are we gonna make them sit at the back of the plane then?

Trillian's avatar

@evil2 Who said anything about them being singled out? Everyone was going to be scanned, and these two princesses singled themselves out by kicking up a fuss.

Just_some_guy's avatar

@evil2 I have talked on this point scroll up. I think we are not singled out. Are you saying that non-Muslims are not subject to this. Everyone is getting scanned. This is the point most people here are trying to make. Those who support the security measure do so because everyone is subject to it.

Dr_Dredd's avatar

@LKidKyle1985 Thank you. That was what I was trying to say about the intelligence agencies.

Val123's avatar

@Just_some_guy I was just wondering exactly what a scan shows, then you posted that link….and it’s not available. Please sir. Do you have anotha?

Trillian's avatar

@Val123 More? You want more gruel? Rrrraaaaauuuuggghgghhhhhh! ;-)

Val123's avatar

@Trillian Don’t hit me!

Val123's avatar

@Trillian (This is giving me an idea for a movie…..:)

Factotum's avatar

@Seek_Kolinahr I oppose the scans. I also oppose being able to opt out of them on ‘religious grounds’ or other technicalities.

My point of attack would be more along these lines: http://www.prisonplanet.com/exposed-naked-body-scanner-images-of-film-star-printed-circulated.html

Seek's avatar

Exactly my argument, @Factotum

On the strip-search legalities, and the radiation, as well as the public printouts. Good article.

Just_some_guy's avatar

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/01/03/britain.body.scans/index.html It does appear that you can see the basic shape and size of a persons genitals. But it isn’t nearly as relieving as a naked picture. As for handing out pictures once again we fall back to the fact that people cannot be trusted. Perhaps a program that doesn’t allow printing or saving of the picture. The pictures are not needed for later review. They are needed on a right now basis. As for the radiation it was said to be lower than a cell phone. I hope you don’t have a smoke alarm because man there is radiation from that too. Apparently safety has its risks also.

Just_some_guy's avatar

relieving = revealing

Seek's avatar

Safety is supposed to remove risk. That’s why it’s called “safety”.

Also, outline of genitals = naked. If a man walked around in public with a pair of tights around his package, he’d still be arrested for indecent exposure.

Just_some_guy's avatar

u have never seen a man in a speedo? As many have said: don’t fly then you will not be exposed to this. I do think their should be another option. If the Jews can do it with how strict their religion is. I can’t see why anyone else can’t. As for the people who passed around a picture of someone. They should be fired and their record should permanently show this incident. Most jobs require a background check if you are in a position like this. It would weed out some bad workers, and give reason for others not to do the same. Safety doesn’t remove risk in any environment. Air bags another example of safety measures being risky. After all the safety measures put into workplace environments injuries are still very high. Not as high, but still more than a nuisance. I think we cannot see eye to eye on this since I don’t have an issue with people seeing my body. I imagine I would also autograph the pics for the airport ladies. : ) I hope that the people who make these decisions come up with a better alternative. I am sure they will so long as it is an issue for people.

Seek's avatar

@Just_some_guy

I’m an atheist. I have absolutely no religious conviction whatsoever. I do, however, have the right to not be photographed naked, and potentially have that photographed saved, printed, and passed around as a souvenir. If I wanted that to happen, I’d pose for Playboy (not that anyone needs me to do that).

Dr_Dredd's avatar

@Just_some_guy The program supposedly already doesn’t allow for saving of the images. Unfortunately, the TSA demanded that a back door be put in so that privacy safeguards can be overridden.

wilma's avatar

No pass, but a manual exam by a woman should be available instead.
I have had my number come up for the security body search. It wasn’t fun, and I wondered why me, but I wanted to get on that plane.

Ron_C's avatar

I see no reason to exempt a person from laws we all must follow based on religion.

As a matter of fact, if they use religion as an excuse not to comply, that merits special attention. Suicide murders have been known to be women or men dressed as women. The ridiculous Muslim modesty rules make it easy for fully veiled people to bypass security. That is why there had been a slight upswing in female suicide murders.

Of course it is reprehensible for their leaders to manipulate anyone into that situation, especially women because they only gain slavery practicing that religion.

philosopher's avatar

@Ron_C
I agree the laws are for everyone.

Sophief's avatar

They shouldn’t be allowed on the planes.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther