Citing Modesty, Two Women Refuse Full-Body Scans

Pope Benedict and Muslim scholars have warned that the scanner—slated for major U.S. airports—violate principles of human dignity and chastity.

Her.meneutics March 8, 2010

Two Muslim women boarding a plane in Manchester, England, last week became trailblazers in the debate over full-body scanners by refusing to undergo the scan, citing religious and medical restrictions. They forfeited their £400 airline tickets to Pakistan, as such scans became compulsory in the UK in February. The women are the first known passengers to refuse a scan under the new rule. Muslim scholars in the U.S. have already issued a fatwa against full-body scans as a violation of Islamic teaching on modesty.

More airports worldwide are installing full-body scanners after the Christmas Day bombing attempt by a Muslim Nigerian carrying explosives in his underwear on a Detroit-bound flight. The first round of 150 full-body scanners slated for major U.S. airports are being installed today in Boston’s Logan International Airport.

The Times (UK) reports that full-body scans give security staff detailed images of passengers’ nude bodies, which human rights groups decry as a “virtual strip search.” According to the Associated Press, the images are viewed in a private room and conceal passengers’ faces to protect identity. The U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has assured passengers that the scans are optional and that images are deleted. (This may not be true outside the U.S.; GetReligion’s Mollie Ziegler Hemingway notes that one Indian celebrity has already said he received printed images of his nude body at Heathrow.)

All these assurances may not be enough to protect passengers’ dignity, said Pope Benedict XVI at a meeting with airline staff February 20. “It is essential never to lose sight of respect for the primacy of the person,” he said. While he acknowledged this would be challenging given “the economic crisis, which is bringing about problematic effects in the civil aviation sector, and the threat of international terrorism, which is targeting airports and aircraft,” the Pope urged that “the primary asset to be safeguarded and treasured is the person, in his or her integrity.”

At the Chicago Tribune‘s Seeker blog, Sister Anne Flanagan said her own objections to the scans stem from Catholics’ sacramental view of the body, one that says it reveals spiritual truths about God’s created intent for human sexuality and relationships. The sacramental view, expressed in Pope John Paul II’s magnum opus, Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body, holds that the body is not a mere receptacle for the soul. Sister Flanagan explains:

It is not true that our body is just a sort of envelope for a sexlessly generic soul, or that it is a strange animal-like appendage to the “important,” spiritual part, but that really doesn’t matter in itself …. We ought to be alert to the tremendous significance of being “bodied persons”: God became incarnate so he could relate to us in this very human way!

So there’s something really not right … with a “revelation” of the body that takes place anonymously, apart from personal communion, in which I am being revealed to someone I cannot see or know; whose reaction I cannot gauge; whose trustworthiness with the sacredness of my body’s image I am asked to take on the good faith of the [TSA].

The Muslim scholars who issued a fatwa rooted their argument in chastity rather than a sacramental view of the body. “[A full-body scan] is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,” said the Fiqh Council of North America. “Islam highly emphasizes haya [modesty] and considers it part of faith. The Qur’an has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.” The council urged Muslims to opt for physical pat-downs, which the TSA provides with officers of the same sex.

No major Protestant groups have issued statements about the scanners.

If full-body scans were to arrive at an airport near you, would you opt out of them? If so, what would be your biblical-theological reasons for doing so?

Our Latest

These Christians Have Not Given Up on North Korea

Experts and practitioners discuss their top challenges and encouragements in serving the reclusive country.

Mobilizers See Millions of Future Missionaries in Overseas Filipino Workers

While Filipino Christians are reaching the diaspora, cross-cultural evangelism efforts face challenges.

Sports Betting Has Become Too Prevalent for Christians to Ignore

Online gambling isn’t necessarily sinful, but it’s certainly not a careful use of the wealth God has given us.

News

You Can Turn Off the News and Still Be a Good Citizen

Five experts share advice for Christians overwhelmed by the headlines

Excerpt

God at the Bottom of the Glass

An excerpt from “The Road to Wisdom: On Truth, Science, Faith, and Trust” on discovering the hand of God in the science of his creation.

Review

Parents Today Are Kinder and Gentler. They Can Still Take Sin Seriously.

A new book aligns modern approaches to raising children with the ancient wisdom of God’s Word.

Shielded from Truth at Our Own Expense

The Bible consistently tells us we must examine ourselves and accept correction, but our culture is forgetting the art of fair critique.

School Screens Are Worst for the Least of These

Apple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squareGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastRSSRSSSaveSaveSaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube