-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Muslim-American Group Says Airport Scanners Violate Islamic Law
- Thread starter Magnetic Poles
- Start date
poncho
Well-Known Member
Either way you'll still show up naked on Google Image Search.
I guess this means you're going to avoid all the other points I've made then?
What points?
That the scanners will cost money?
I'm sure they will.
Are you the one paying for them?
What's your point?
Steven2006
New Member
You can't seriously think any of us would end up with naked picture on a google search? You are either being wildly over dramatic or a bit paranoid.
You could maybe make the argument that a celebrity might have that fear, but considering how most celebrity allow themselves to be photographed anyways I don't think too many of them would be seriously concerned about a scan.
IMO - there is a type that rails against whatever so that they can feel superior to those of us mindless lemmings who roll over to government authority or whatever.
It's a remnant of the sixty's...
Fight the man !!! :laugh:
windcatcher
New Member
Poncho is correct.
The scanners are a violation of privacy and modesty. The contracts and specifications for the scanners require that they are capable of capturing pictures.
Think about it. A scanner produces some reason for detention and a further search. It is necessary to be able to capture and hold the picture as evidence of cause for other warrants and searches.
Incidentally, the scanners which check for metals do not invade the body as most people know and it is foolish to equate them to this kind of scan.
Also, the powder found on the 'Christmas Day' bomber would not have been detected by these new scanners.
Yes, as a woman with some modesty intact, I am concerned about privacy and modesty breakdown. If I were a parent, I'd be concerned about child porn and my children being scanned. Our government is proposing requirements that it be permitted picture capture for which it would prosecute an innocent parent. If a man is the type of man that would appeal to me...... he would also be incensed to have his government suggest that his wife or his daughters be subjected to such a revealing scan.
But then, the men are already being challenged in so many ways by our society, including the unseen molecular attack of compounds not naturally occurring in our food..... that its no wonder that so few have the cannolies to stand up against propositions which are so much full of manure.
The scanners are a violation of privacy and modesty. The contracts and specifications for the scanners require that they are capable of capturing pictures.
Think about it. A scanner produces some reason for detention and a further search. It is necessary to be able to capture and hold the picture as evidence of cause for other warrants and searches.
Incidentally, the scanners which check for metals do not invade the body as most people know and it is foolish to equate them to this kind of scan.
Also, the powder found on the 'Christmas Day' bomber would not have been detected by these new scanners.
Yes, as a woman with some modesty intact, I am concerned about privacy and modesty breakdown. If I were a parent, I'd be concerned about child porn and my children being scanned. Our government is proposing requirements that it be permitted picture capture for which it would prosecute an innocent parent. If a man is the type of man that would appeal to me...... he would also be incensed to have his government suggest that his wife or his daughters be subjected to such a revealing scan.
But then, the men are already being challenged in so many ways by our society, including the unseen molecular attack of compounds not naturally occurring in our food..... that its no wonder that so few have the cannolies to stand up against propositions which are so much full of manure.
No...you got it wrong. He's just paranoid.
Marcia
Active Member
windcatcher
New Member
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Face it: The reason this is a silly issue to you is because some Muslims protests on religious grounds. Don't we have similar grounds and moral values to stand on here? OH, but this is just a silly issue.
But think, too, is it really enough to have a person of the same gender.
What is your government saying about their respect for you, when they already have enough information on you from SS #, to employment records, to other details of your life, banking, schooling, who you're married to, past census data, legal records and law violations, biometric information they are already collecting through drivers licenses and possibly health check-ups, and internet records which they can check if they are already suspicious? Why should your freedom of movement suddenly become a cause for treating you like a person of suspicion and justify a violation of your privacy and modesty when you've presented no cause or pattern, and only a handful of 'terrorist' have gotten away with the 'big event' over so many years?
We could hope we were living in a perfect world where crime did not exist and people were not evil and where the innocents were not targeted: But the truth is now the same as always...... we live by faith and not by sight. Every day we place ourselves into the hands of God: We do or fail to do that for which he holds us responsible to take reasonable care of ourselves and commit the rest to him. Every time we're made fearful by some event which hasn't happened to us.... an event which really doesn't have such regular occurrance as to be of statistical significance and probablity..... but if our fear is increased to the point we feel a personal threat to our own security and those of loved ones, then we're induced to want 'insurance' or 'assurance' that we can escape that risk. Government enters the picture with its promises that it can provide this assurance, this security, this saving from the threat of death, but it extracts from us a price and charges us at the expense of our liberty and places requirements and controls upon us which it requires of others in order to initiate the very 'protections' it says are required. At each turn where we're asked to give up something for our protection becomes an added dare to evil men determined to break through the security fences man has devised. And each success of theirs initiates more restrictions designed upon us. Each control which restricts our freedom and gives government more latitude places more of our personal information in their control, and broadens the exposure we have to unscrupluous people who have access.
Nope? How about the uncircumsized male in this scan?
Then nakedness and modesty mean nothing to you.
Face it: The reason this is a silly issue to you is because some Muslims protests on religious grounds. Don't we have similar grounds and moral values to stand on here? OH, but this is just a silly issue.
Thinking is good, Scarlett, keep doing it.
But think, too, is it really enough to have a person of the same gender.
What is your government saying about their respect for you, when they already have enough information on you from SS #, to employment records, to other details of your life, banking, schooling, who you're married to, past census data, legal records and law violations, biometric information they are already collecting through drivers licenses and possibly health check-ups, and internet records which they can check if they are already suspicious? Why should your freedom of movement suddenly become a cause for treating you like a person of suspicion and justify a violation of your privacy and modesty when you've presented no cause or pattern, and only a handful of 'terrorist' have gotten away with the 'big event' over so many years?
They're the same people who've given their word that the scanners do not keep and store pictures..... when they lie knowing that that is one of the criteria which qualifies the scanners.... so that a record can be kept and used for search warrants and prosecutions. What makes you think they wont lie about same gender access only?
We could hope we were living in a perfect world where crime did not exist and people were not evil and where the innocents were not targeted: But the truth is now the same as always...... we live by faith and not by sight. Every day we place ourselves into the hands of God: We do or fail to do that for which he holds us responsible to take reasonable care of ourselves and commit the rest to him. Every time we're made fearful by some event which hasn't happened to us.... an event which really doesn't have such regular occurrance as to be of statistical significance and probablity..... but if our fear is increased to the point we feel a personal threat to our own security and those of loved ones, then we're induced to want 'insurance' or 'assurance' that we can escape that risk. Government enters the picture with its promises that it can provide this assurance, this security, this saving from the threat of death, but it extracts from us a price and charges us at the expense of our liberty and places requirements and controls upon us which it requires of others in order to initiate the very 'protections' it says are required. At each turn where we're asked to give up something for our protection becomes an added dare to evil men determined to break through the security fences man has devised. And each success of theirs initiates more restrictions designed upon us. Each control which restricts our freedom and gives government more latitude places more of our personal information in their control, and broadens the exposure we have to unscrupluous people who have access.
You are joking right? You are being sarcastic, right?
SOURCE
Nope? How about the uncircumsized male in this scan?
Sometimes folks have a right to 'rail' and it has nothing to do with superiority! Somethings are just right and somethings are just wrong!
Just to show you how silly this sounds...
Then the death of innocent people blown up on airplanes by terrorists means nothing to you.
And you reach this illogical conclusion how?
Who said that you don't?
If all of this is true - why do you comply with passing through a metal detector or having you luggage inspected?
Why should you be treated like a suspect?
Because airline security is a real concern?
Isn't the issue here really a matter of degree?
I think that it would be a fun idea to save all the scans of all the passengers on a particular flight until it safely lands and then delete them.
Tell the Muslim terrorists that if a plane is blown up that their scans will be publicly broadcast by TV, newspaper, magazines and the internet if they blow up the plane. :laugh:
Maybe the threat will keep them off the plane.
So the answer is to do nothing? Or some things?
As I said before it is a question of a matter of degree.
What are the steps that we should be taking?
Can you tell us?
Now I find this interesting on several levels.
First - if you truly find the scan offensive why did you provide a link?
Would you have provided a link to truly pornographic site?
Second - you used a particular word - uncircumsized - that provides detail that I certainly was unable to see.
Why would you use that word?
So that those who choose not to follow your link would imagine a level of detail that just isn't there and thereby garner support for you opinion on this subject?
And sometimes it does. If you read the post by that same contributor just prior to my observation you might see that in this particular instance it applies.
I have reproduced it below for your benefit.
Poncho said:
Last edited by a moderator:
KenH
Well-Known Member
You are correct.
I believe the scans do violate personal privacy. For that reason, they should not be allowed, but NOT because the Muslims don't like it.
NEWS FLASH! This is AMERICA and if the Muslims don't like our laws, they can go overseas to Muslim countries that enforce their own religious laws. I see this as an attempt by Muslims to try to force their religious laws to become accepted as American laws, and that's a tactic they will try to use to take over our nation. Sorry, I don't buy it.
This should be a constitutional issue, not a "religious" issue.
NEWS FLASH! This is AMERICA and if the Muslims don't like our laws, they can go overseas to Muslim countries that enforce their own religious laws. I see this as an attempt by Muslims to try to force their religious laws to become accepted as American laws, and that's a tactic they will try to use to take over our nation. Sorry, I don't buy it.
This should be a constitutional issue, not a "religious" issue.
Trotter
<img src =/6412.jpg>
Yes, they are an invasion of privacy. That is the price we all have to pay because of the actions of members of this so-called "peaceful" religion that is now all upset about the very scanners their compatriots have caused to be installed. I could care less if they wanted to print out my scan as it would be good for a laugh and very little else. I would not be wild about a printout of my wife being circulated, but the detail level of the scan wouldn't give much excitement. (The image search linked above showed many images, but most were mock-ups or flat-out fakes)
Basically, you can go through the scanners or you can stay on the ground. Period. I don't care who you are what you worship. I am also against full face coverings as it allows people to hide their identities.
Either abide by the regulations or find another way to get where you are going. See, that wasn't so hard, was it?
Basically, you can go through the scanners or you can stay on the ground. Period. I don't care who you are what you worship. I am also against full face coverings as it allows people to hide their identities.
Either abide by the regulations or find another way to get where you are going. See, that wasn't so hard, was it?
And isn't it odd that the very person who claims to be so offended by these "naked pictures" would put a link to them on the board?
windcatcher
New Member
The link was already on this board and the fact that you didn't already address it before I brought attention to it means you've been spouting hot air all this time.
I'm not offended by naked pictures. I don't care to seek them out or look, but the picture in article shows clearly the anatomical shape of a mature male figure. It is more like a negative but it is distinctive enough. I wouldn't want pictures of children nor adults taken as a routine screening method when we already have so many other methods employed.
But.... like you've already stated..... it doesn't matter to you about your privacy and governments invasion. Evidentally you're so scared a terrorist may kill you or take others out with you. You said its a matter of degrees when you should be saying the truth that degrees don't matter when it comes to government trying to protect you.
poncho
Well-Known Member
As you can see from our friend's posts windcatcher some folks still believe the "big lie" that only the corporate controlled government can keep them safe.