European rabbis up in arms over body scanners
Several European rabbis are up in arms over the prospect of full body scanners being used on passengers at airports. The rabbis, from Milan, London, Paris and Antwerp, have issued a press release in which they suggest a solution that would satisfy the sensitivities of Orthodox Jews while meeting the need for increased security in airline travel. "We would recommend that men are scanned by men, and women by women, like body frisks," they wrote.I don't know about the rest of you, and I don't know what these scanners show, but I'm not real comfortable with the idea either. If I meet up with one (which is possible because they're using them in London and I tend to fly through there a lot when I go to Boston), I'm going to ask for a manual search instead.
One of the European rabbis agreed to weigh in on the halachic aspects of using the scanner.
"I do not intend to give a halachic opinion and I do not know what actually is shown on the screen, but if it shows the female body then it could be against the laws of modesty," said Rabbi Ya'akov Schmahl, a member of Antwerp's rabbinical court.
The rabbi explained that according to Jewish law it is permitted for a male doctor to treat female patients even if he touches them and sees parts of their body that are normally covered because presumably a doctor is focused on his work and is not inclined to prurience.
"But if women are not happy - and there are religious women who prefer not to go to male doctors - they should be allowed to be monitored by women. And men might also might not want to show themselves before women."
UPDATE 5:35 PM
Reader Danny F sent me images taken from the full body scanner in the Salt Lake City, Utah airport. This is exactly what the technician sees. Note that the faces are blurred.
Hmmm. I doubt this would qualify for Rule 5.
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 4:06 PM
6 Comments:
Hi Carl,
I actually had the priveledge of using a full-body scanner last week in Salt Lake City. Overall, the SLC security process was so well coordinated and serious, that I was thoroughly impressed.
When you approach the scanner, however, there is a large sign and security guard advising travelers that if they do not feel comfortable with the full body scanner, they can go with the traditional approach: metal detector and random pat downs. I was so taken aback by this system: allow the people who are most in need of a full body scan to circumvent it. I was kvetching about this so much to my girlfriend that I had no choice but to breach the subject with one of the security officials (complementing their security gauntlet but asking about the opt-out of full body scanning).
I was intoduced to the head of security for the SLC airport and had a wonderful confab with him for 15 minutes or so. Regarding the optionality of full-body scans, he agreed that it is dispicable that the most suspicious passengers can opt out of the most effective anti-terrorism technology - noting that the standard metal detector approach is grossly ineffective. He blamed the moonbat congressmen who place the privacy of terrorists above the safety of passengers.
Regarding the scan technology he explained: the scan-reader sits in a locked door back room; every images is shown without the passenger's face. He then showed me a set of images that the machine produces. In my humble opinion, there is nothing objectionable here. The images look like a hybrid of an X-ray and a CAT scan of sorts. In no way is a passenger revealed in an inappropriate manner. I very much respect our right to privacy, and I was comfortable with this scan image being seen by trained security officials. (No different than a doctor reviewing an x-ray for medial purposes, in this case for security purposes.)
The official continued that the machines kept the security lines running at a processing clip far beyond what the airport use to manage - also eliminating the need for invasive and time-consuming body searches. After the Christmas Day terrorist attempt, he placed a bulk order for additional machines.
I was nonplussed that SLC aiport takes security SO much more seriously than my destination that day - Newark Airport. While I was on the flight, tuned into my Delta inflight TV, I learned of the breach of security at Newark. Why does a small airport in the Utah mountains understand the threat and refuse to take risks with travelers' lives? All I could think to myself was: I think I need to move to a "Red State".
I'm not orthodox, but I agree. It isn't too much to ask for gender specific observers. this shouldn't be just for the religious. are we going to deny that sexuality exists?
Time to take out the lead underway again.
My only concern is "what's next?"
- 20 years ago, if someone had said we would ALL go through metal detectors, no one would have believed it.
- 10 years ago, if anyone had said that we would all have to take our shoes off, no one would have believed it.
- 5 years ago, if anyone had said that we would not be able to take a simple bottle of water with us, no one would have believed it.
- 3 years ago, if anyone had said we would all have to go through scanning revealing nude pictures, no one would have believed it.
When the next bomber carries the explosive inside his body and the TSA decides to start performing random cavity searches and colonoscopies, will that be such a big surprise?
I think its halachic.... it scans the human body for metal and as the picture shows its not pornographic or compromising of human dignity in any way. And its a technology acceptable for saving human life. I would like to point out body scanners raise fewer halachic questions than organ transplants do. I submit to Carl, that offended feelings can be quickly healed while a lost human life can be never restored, So from the viewpoint of the observant Jew, it would seem permissible as it looks for stuff on the body not integral to it that could pose a danger to others.
I thought they'd be up in arms about security discovering that women wear wigs or some shave their hair. A lot of frum women are going to have to get there early when they are asked to remove their wig every time they go through security. I wear a scarf adn I'm often asked to remove it, I ask to go to a side-room. I don't like those pictures and don't feel too comfortable about having one taken of me, I also would like to know how much radiation I will be exposed to and what effect it could have on me. Also on children and pregnant women. WHy can't they profile like Israel does?
Post a Comment
<< Home