Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, September 30, 2009
Religion There Is No Morality Without Religion
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:20 PM
A former Roman Catholic bishop from Nova Scotia is facing child pornography charges. Raymond Lahey, the former bishop of the diocese of Antigonish, is known as the man who oversaw a $15-million settlement with people who said they had been sexually abused by priests in the diocese dating back to 1950. He was returning to Canada from the United States when he was arrested at the Ottawa Airport last week after members of the Canada Border Services Agency performed a random check of his laptop computer.Lahey has been charged with distributing and selling child pornography.
But it's no big deal—the numbers of priests distributing and selling child pornography probably doesn't top 5%, and no doubt the Jews are doing it too.
1
Wait, the border patrol can perform random searches on your laptop? Yeesh. That creeps me out a bit. I mean, not more than a pedophile priest creeps me out, but still.
2
Julie, where have you been for the past few years? Not only can they do a random search of your electronics, they've been known to seize them and fail to return them.
4
Could be worse, he could be selling MJ seeds into the States.
Or be a film director who was/is a perv.
Or be a film director who was/is a perv.
5
Hmm. I guess I haven't been to Canada in ten years or so. Can/do they do that whenever you fly into another country? I suppose it depends on the country? What about when you're coming back into the US? I've flown with my laptop internationally a number of times in the past few years and I've never event thought about that being a possibility.
It's not like I'm hiding criminal activity or anything, but somehow searching my laptop feels a lot more invasive than going through my luggage.
It's not like I'm hiding criminal activity or anything, but somehow searching my laptop feels a lot more invasive than going through my luggage.
6
I'm sure we all take comfort knowing that, according to the Vatican, he's not a pedophile, he's just a gay who wants to have sex with kids.
7
Well, it's unlikely that the Canada Border Services Agency can search your laptop when you're flying into Bogota, Copenhagen, or Melbourne. Keep in mind who "they" is in this story, as always.
Border guards have always been able to search whatever the fuck they want, always.
Border guards have always been able to search whatever the fuck they want, always.
9
And Julie, U.S. Customs (now part of Homeland Security) seizes laptops all the time. Even those of American citizens.
10
So a Catholic bishop who was in charge of distributing a $15 million settlement to victims of priestly pedophilia is, himself, a child pornographer? Wow! It has to be true. No one could make that shit up.
11
Fnarf, I clearly meant something like "is it standard practice in other countries for customs/border officials to be able to search laptop files."
Google tells me that I apparently missed the news last year that the Dept of Homeland Security can search and seize laptops (and copy the contents!) at random if you're entering or leaving the country. Without individual suspicion. I mean, is it reasonable for a customs agent to go through my paper files, and review (and copy!) work-related documents? Or for them to read my diary or personal letters? Without suspicion? Because that's what they can do with laptops apparently.
I know I'm late to this party, but, damn. That seems like the very definition of unreasonable search and seizure.
Google tells me that I apparently missed the news last year that the Dept of Homeland Security can search and seize laptops (and copy the contents!) at random if you're entering or leaving the country. Without individual suspicion. I mean, is it reasonable for a customs agent to go through my paper files, and review (and copy!) work-related documents? Or for them to read my diary or personal letters? Without suspicion? Because that's what they can do with laptops apparently.
I know I'm late to this party, but, damn. That seems like the very definition of unreasonable search and seizure.
13
You have to love the comparative, nothing says your sorry like "But, but, but, they do it, too. And, and, it's worse because there are more of them then us.". Or to ignore the fact that priests being male spend more time with just males, than their youth minister counterparts do. If your spending time justifying or comparing your actions, then you really haven't arrived at full repentance. You're just adding to the trajedy. Sheesh.
14
Sheeesh. They rape little kids, and you get upset. They find away to not rape little kids, and you still get upset! What is if with you people?!
15
Julie:
Proefessional accounting organizations (and I assume other professional organizations) are warning members to ensure they don't have client information on laptops crossing the US/Canada border in case said laptop is seized/ never returned/ copied. If quiet dullintensely boring accountants have to worry about having their data snatched by border services, no one is safe from snooping at the border.
Proefessional accounting organizations (and I assume other professional organizations) are warning members to ensure they don't have client information on laptops crossing the US/Canada border in case said laptop is seized/ never returned/ copied. If quiet dullintensely boring accountants have to worry about having their data snatched by border services, no one is safe from snooping at the border.
17
This is unexpected. The secular defenses of pedophilia as a mental dysfunction, specifically the differentiation of pedo- and ephebophilia are being expressed by the Vatican.
However, I'm not sure what the Vatican's intentions are by defining these priests as gay ephebophiles (which are not mentally ill based on this attraction) rather than actual pedophiles (which, according to the DSM IV are). It does raise the actual issue which is not that of attraction, but that these priests were compelled to act on their desires; a problem that runs rampant through the Catholic clergy and monastic communities.
It's not unlike either definition is going to paint these predators in a better light. Either they're crazies, who are preying on kids, or they're not-so-crazies who are preying on underaged teens. Either way, they're still predators, and need psychiatric institutionalization. Religious rehabilitation and transfer is going to be about as effective as excorcism.
However, I'm not sure what the Vatican's intentions are by defining these priests as gay ephebophiles (which are not mentally ill based on this attraction) rather than actual pedophiles (which, according to the DSM IV are). It does raise the actual issue which is not that of attraction, but that these priests were compelled to act on their desires; a problem that runs rampant through the Catholic clergy and monastic communities.
It's not unlike either definition is going to paint these predators in a better light. Either they're crazies, who are preying on kids, or they're not-so-crazies who are preying on underaged teens. Either way, they're still predators, and need psychiatric institutionalization. Religious rehabilitation and transfer is going to be about as effective as excorcism.
18
This is seems the only place I found on line so far with so many reasonable comments on this stupid bishop's case. The media is so confused, that they call him 'Former bishop' or Ex-bishop because he resigned and his resignation was accepted by the Vatican. He is still a bishop, with child porn warrant on him, and he has been judged sentenced and burnt on modern media stake. Over one hundred thousand kids are murdered in Canada every year, and they get not one second on the news, not one. Here the old fool has 'child porn', most likely in his internet explorer cache, and a big drama starts. Congratulations Canada! Thanks for the advice on accounting data not to be on the laptops. I heard before that they also can charge you for music files, or movies (clean ones) if they suspect they are downloaded. Thank you guys for great comments!
19
This situation does pose the question regarding the jurisdiction of a random search. Consider, if my laptop is selected for a random search:
Am I the target of the search or just the laptop? Or is it bag containing the laptop? All my luggage?
What if my luggage contains someone else's laptop, say, my daughter's or wife's? What about an alleged broken one I chose to take home and repair? Am I still responsible for the data left on it?
If I have a hard drive in another bag, is that considered part of the same search?
If I carry with me around 140 gigabytes in about twenty flash drives, SD cards etc. on my person and amongst my luggage. Are they subject to the same (increasingly lengthy, painstaking) search?
What about encrypted files? Am I forced to open them? What happens if I refuse? What happens if those files contain national or corporate secrets? What if they contain my private medical data?
What about the music player I have in my pocket? How do they determine my .mp3s were downloaded rather than made locally? What if I downloaded them, but own the album, hence the rights to hear the product (which I personally do so, often)?
What about my cell phone, and the 8gb card contained therein? Is that subject to search as well?
What specifically are they searching for? Illegal pictures, i.e. child pornography? Pirated media? Evidence of terrorist activity? Corporate slush funds? Anything on which they can bust me for something?
Do we Americans have the fourth amendment anymore? Does Canada have any kind of equivalent?
Am I the target of the search or just the laptop? Or is it bag containing the laptop? All my luggage?
What if my luggage contains someone else's laptop, say, my daughter's or wife's? What about an alleged broken one I chose to take home and repair? Am I still responsible for the data left on it?
If I have a hard drive in another bag, is that considered part of the same search?
If I carry with me around 140 gigabytes in about twenty flash drives, SD cards etc. on my person and amongst my luggage. Are they subject to the same (increasingly lengthy, painstaking) search?
What about encrypted files? Am I forced to open them? What happens if I refuse? What happens if those files contain national or corporate secrets? What if they contain my private medical data?
What about the music player I have in my pocket? How do they determine my .mp3s were downloaded rather than made locally? What if I downloaded them, but own the album, hence the rights to hear the product (which I personally do so, often)?
What about my cell phone, and the 8gb card contained therein? Is that subject to search as well?
What specifically are they searching for? Illegal pictures, i.e. child pornography? Pirated media? Evidence of terrorist activity? Corporate slush funds? Anything on which they can bust me for something?
Do we Americans have the fourth amendment anymore? Does Canada have any kind of equivalent?
20
Let's talk about data!
My computer can be seized for suspected downloaded material? Is that right? So if I rendered my DVDs to DIVX .avis for easy viewing would that count? What if I downloaded the file instead, but also own the DVD, myself (and hence the rights to view the film)?
Let us say they find pornography: is only child pornography grounds to seize, or any kind that is illegal in the regions I'm entering or leaving? Or just if it gets my search team all excited?
Can they confiscate because it's gay porn, and they dislike gays (whether or not the porn is legal)? In this regard, do I get to be told what specifically they found on my system that incurred confiscation, or my detainment?
What about fetish porn? BDSM? Splosh play? In some states, being outed as a fetishist can have serious consequences. Can I expect to have my kids seized because some border sentry found leather sites in my web-browser history?
Let's consider the grey zones: Americans have already been convicted due to the 2003 PROTECT act pulling drawn or computer rendered depictions of explicit children and children in sexual situations into the jurisdiction of anti-child-pornography laws, leading a Virginian fan of Japanese manga, only a small percentage of his collection of which was hentai, and only a small percentage of that was lolicon to being sentenced for twenty years imprisonment for possession of child porn. What makes it child porn when the images rendered are not really human? When the depictions are arbitrarily decided to be underage by law enforcement, or a judge.
This also means many mainstream comics enter this grey zone. Reading things like Neil Gaiman's Sandman series, say a particular page from A Doll's House, or any page of Allan Moore's Lost Girls could land you prison time, should the authorities be searching for something to pin on you.
This is also to say, a toon sketch of Bart and Lisa Simpson getting it on, even if not explicit, can land you years in prison. Are your web caches open to a random search? How good is your ad-blocking software?
The UK has already erred with Austrailia on the side of Bart and Lisa having the same privacy rights as living, breathing eight- and ten-year-olds from the local primary school. I would assume Canada would fall in line with them (still being technically adhered to the UK). The precedent-setting case was ruled against the aforementioned Virginian in 2008, even though any artist with Adobe Poser can (and will!) experiment with anatomically correct digital mannequins to produce some felonious renders. The ruling from Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition was meant to protect such fledgling artists and the countless anime fans and artists in Japan and the US who might delve into the risqué.
Now they'll all get to have a party with the sexting convicts down at corrections, I suppose.
Is anyone else as frightened by this level of intrusion as I am?
More...
My computer can be seized for suspected downloaded material? Is that right? So if I rendered my DVDs to DIVX .avis for easy viewing would that count? What if I downloaded the file instead, but also own the DVD, myself (and hence the rights to view the film)?
Let us say they find pornography: is only child pornography grounds to seize, or any kind that is illegal in the regions I'm entering or leaving? Or just if it gets my search team all excited?
Can they confiscate because it's gay porn, and they dislike gays (whether or not the porn is legal)? In this regard, do I get to be told what specifically they found on my system that incurred confiscation, or my detainment?
What about fetish porn? BDSM? Splosh play? In some states, being outed as a fetishist can have serious consequences. Can I expect to have my kids seized because some border sentry found leather sites in my web-browser history?
Let's consider the grey zones: Americans have already been convicted due to the 2003 PROTECT act pulling drawn or computer rendered depictions of explicit children and children in sexual situations into the jurisdiction of anti-child-pornography laws, leading a Virginian fan of Japanese manga, only a small percentage of his collection of which was hentai, and only a small percentage of that was lolicon to being sentenced for twenty years imprisonment for possession of child porn. What makes it child porn when the images rendered are not really human? When the depictions are arbitrarily decided to be underage by law enforcement, or a judge.
This also means many mainstream comics enter this grey zone. Reading things like Neil Gaiman's Sandman series, say a particular page from A Doll's House, or any page of Allan Moore's Lost Girls could land you prison time, should the authorities be searching for something to pin on you.
This is also to say, a toon sketch of Bart and Lisa Simpson getting it on, even if not explicit, can land you years in prison. Are your web caches open to a random search? How good is your ad-blocking software?
The UK has already erred with Austrailia on the side of Bart and Lisa having the same privacy rights as living, breathing eight- and ten-year-olds from the local primary school. I would assume Canada would fall in line with them (still being technically adhered to the UK). The precedent-setting case was ruled against the aforementioned Virginian in 2008, even though any artist with Adobe Poser can (and will!) experiment with anatomically correct digital mannequins to produce some felonious renders. The ruling from Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition was meant to protect such fledgling artists and the countless anime fans and artists in Japan and the US who might delve into the risqué.
Now they'll all get to have a party with the sexting convicts down at corrections, I suppose.
Is anyone else as frightened by this level of intrusion as I am?
21
Does anyone else find it disturbing that in a story about a Bishop found with child porn, everyone is focusing on the event that led to his arrest. A random search of his laptop. Don't you think that when they ran his passport that their possibly already was a red flag on this man so the "random" search wasn't so random at all.
22
stacerbean @21, If they're not random searches, they shouldn't be called random. A friend of mine is subject to random searches all the time disproportionately more than the rest of the line (and I, with her, when I'm her traveling partner). Exactly why she is so selected has never been made clear. We suspect it has to do with other family that are on a restricted-fly list, but still. It's not random, and implying it is suggests privacy rights will be / are being violated when they aren't necessarily.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (22) RSS