A scanner standoff: Con

Balancing increased airline security needs with a valued tradition of personal privacy causes perennial frustration to the general public as well as government officials.

The introduction of full-body scanners has generated some of the most recent controversy. The Transportation Security Administration has introduced them in airports across the country, causing some concern among passengers and organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union.

More vehement protest was raised recently when two Muslim women in Manchester, U.K., refused to pass through the scanners, opting to forfeit their tickets to Pakistan due to one of the women’s religious objections and the other’s health concerns.

Fortunately, the TSA has been accommodating of the objections of religious minorities to being photographed in what the ACLU has dubbed a “virtual strip search.” After a group of North American scholars issued a fatwa forbidding Muslims to pass through the machine because it violated teachings of religious modesty, the TSA began offering pat downs as an alternative to the machine.

This stands out as an important accommodation of religious minorities and those who object for other reasons. While the predominant response to the machines will likely be a shrug at their intrusiveness, it is unreasonable to expect all reasonable people to agree to having what are essentially naked images of their body made and viewed by a government security officers.

Indeed, it seems intrusive for a government agency to demand such images as a precondition for flying when officers of the same government might arrest us for public indecency if we showed ourselves in such a naked state in the airport, to say nothing of concerns that we prohibit the general public from making such images of children because it is exploitative.

Some say we should not waste time and resources offering pat downs when the full-body scanners are efficient. To suggest as much is the luxury of a majority unconcerned with equal respect for all peoples’ consciences.