Posted on 11/14/2010 6:40:29 PM PST by RandysRight
The Obama position for TSA body scan
The following article is from CNSNEWS concerning CAIR’s directing hajib-wearing Muslim women to tell TSA screeners that their religion directs that they may only be searched around the head and neck instead of a pat down.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has issued a travel warning to Muslim airline passengers on U.S. aircraft in response to the Transportation Safety Administration’s “enhanced pat down” policy that went into effect in late October.
CAIR said Muslims who object to full-body scans for religious reasons should know their rights if they are required to undergo a pat-down, including asking for the procedure to be done in a private place. In addition, CAIR offered a “special recommendation” for Muslim women who wear a hijab, telling them they should tell the TSA officer that they may be searched only around the head and neck.
>>More…
Does this mean if I dress in a shower curtain and refuse current TSA screening due to my religious beliefs that I may also be exempt? Should CAIR’s recommendations hold, the choice for the rest of us non-Muslim folks is either get one of the nudie photos taken or a genital grope. Or not fly. I get furious just thinking about what my 74 year old mother would have to go through in order to board a plane. This whole air plane security thing has gone way too far. (Note to self in future: I’ll drive instead).
Now to top it off the people of the same religious group that attacked us on 9-11 want an exception?? Excuse me, but when did Sharia law replace the Constitutional laws of our Republic? When we start making exceptions to a law for certain groups of people we cease to be a nation of laws, PERIOD.
NC Gal
If you answered yes to any of the above, then what objection do you have to being searched? I agree, it is embarrassing, but the objective is to keep people safe. There isn't some mass conspiracy to save naked pictures of all people who travel in planes. If it can prevent attacks, then suck it up.
You understand that the constitution gives rights from the people to the government and not the other way around, right?
Congratulations, you have been successfully desensitized.
They need to lay off searching grannys and such, but the scanners and pat-downs should be available tools in certain cases.
I didn't have time earlier to give you a full answer.
No, we don't watch television programming in our home. We have a TV set connected to a video player for homeschooling purposes, and carefully selected documentary, science, and history education.
No, we don't go to gyms or swimming pools, or other places where one must use a public dressing room.
A trusted doctor, a professional, who is concerned about our own complaint to him about a specific medical situation concerning us privately cannot be logically equated with the absolutely UN-professional, public pat-downs of our private areas in a public airport.
Even the Chinese have much more professional security personnel at their airports and public transportation areas. They are often in their early twenties, trim, immaculately dressed, very well trained, courteous, not self-willed in the carrying out of their duties, and not personally invasive. They DO profile, and they are very good at picking people out of lines based on a profiling system that is usually very hard to detect by common people passing through.
We fly around east Asia in our work often. The TSA agents in the USA could not pass the rigorous training of the professionals at airports in Asia. Bombs are not getting on planes in east Asia like they are in Europe and the USA, because the professionals there know exactly what they are looking for, and they know how to look for it without feeling people up.
But you may have missed my entire point of equal protection. Right now Muslims are going through checkpoints unmolested. My post with recommendations for Christian people was FOR Christian people who have standards of modesty and discretion. If your personal standards are not at that level, then it is not for you.
My point was that if Muslims can use their "religious" objections and go through un-touched, then devout Christian people also should be protected from public violation of their persons using and insisting upon their own convictions of faith and conscience.
Of course, I am not talking about the modern worldly "evangelical" or theater-schemed mega church person. I am talking about Christians who still hold to the standards of decency, morality, modesty and discretion to which their great-grandparents, grandparents and parents believed and held. And there are still at least hundreds of thousands of this type of individual around our country.
I was recently back in the States and coming through Chicago with my son was a Mennonite extended family: grandparents, parents, and children from teens to infants. They were dressed obviously in a much more traditional modest fashion than anyone else. Their deportment and bearing was also such that it stood out. Because my son and I were dressed similarly, we struck up a conversation with the grandfather, close to my own age, and we got in line at the security check-in with them to a connecting flight.
The TSA agents looked at the whole bunch of us very much differently (they probably thought that my son and I were members of that same family), and we were treated with a much different level of respect when going through, than was afforded most others in the same line.
It is not to be taken that we were not adequately checked for security purposes. It is that the attitude of the agents toward our group was much different. The agents were looking for ways to treat us most gingerly and with more respect.
This all was very obvious to others in line, and there were a half dozen quiet comments made in our hearing (not complaints, merely observations).
My son and I, along with my daughter who picked us up, discussed this difference for a solid hour from Indianapolis to our home.
I am writing this more for the benefit of other Christian people who may be reading this post than for your benefit alone, you understand, which is the mind set I try to use in all responses, since these posts are public.
I maintain my insistence to Christian people of traditionally and Biblically modest bearing, that we use our firm convictions in our protection from unwanted public molestation of our persons by TSA agents.
Certainly you are not of the opinion that agents of the federal government are actuaally serving to provide for the common defense.
If "the common defense" was the objective, we wouldn't have the open border with Mexico that we have.
I didn’t say they were doing a good job of it.
It is not even the good intention of the Obama administration to do a good job at defending our country; rather quite to the contrary.
Like every good communist, this administration evidently believes in fomenting chaos. It is a tenet of Stalinist and Maoist communism that the desired order is born of chaos, and they will foment it to achieve their ends.
I believe that is exactly what Obama and his buddies are doing. I believe that this is what they are attempting at the airports as well.
Well, not in speceific words, but the framers anticipated problems like this, so they are covered. The constitution lists the few things the federal government was authorized to do and a system to extend those things by amendments. It ecplicitly reserves all other things to the states. Implicitly, the constitution forbids the very existence of TSA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.