The following was my talk at theology pub in Richmond Hill, Ontario, January 12, 2014. I spoke on the theology of privacy.
I observe two contradictory trends today: on the one hand, our culture really believes in the notion of privacy–perhaps best exemplified by Pierre Trudeau in 1969:
There’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation. I think that what’s done in private between adults doesn’t concern the Criminal Code.
He said this in regard to Bill C-150 which decriminalized homosexuality in Canada. On the other hand, many of us voluntarily relinquish our privacy through social media and our governments gather our private information without search warrants or probable cause. To understand how great the erosion of privacy rights is, just today I learned that the US border patrol, operating 30 miles inside the US border, arrested Greg Rosenberg an American of Armenian origin for refusing to cooperate with a search of his truck without probable cause. Then, after 19 days, the authorities just simply released Rosenberg dropping all charges.
Here in Canada, the Canadian government required that one out of five households fill out the 2011 Census “long form”, which included questions about what race we are and our sexual orientation. So much for the government staying out of the bedroom of Canadians. Gay activists were the most vocal complainers when the Tory government removed this form. Evidently, they thought that sexual orientation information in the hands of the government could only help their groups. A more pessimistic view of government would suggest that knowing personal data about people makes them vulnerable to special treatment. But I don’t want the attention of government and I would prefer to be invisible.
To wit, the Canadian government, as of July 1, 2014, has singled out certain people for special treatment in the area of banking privacy. The Stephen Harper government has passed legislation authorizing banks to collect information on people with alleged ties to the United States. The banks are to pass their financial data to the CRA which will in turn send that information to the IRS. On the face of it, this is a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on several fronts. But clearly, the victims of this legislation will have their Canadian banking privacy violated with the authorization of Canadian law.
I want to discuss a theology of privacy tonight: Do Christians believe in privacy? What are the limits of privacy? In order to achieve this end, I want to discuss positive law and natural law as the theoretical basis of privacy.
Positive law as the basis of Privacy
Tyrants pass executive orders or edicts–their word has the effect of law. Legislatures write and pass bills into law. These man-made ordinances are called positive law. For example, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) is a law in Canada which governs privacy rights. However, if positive law were the basis of privacy, the government could just as easily create rules taking all privacy away–but that would not make such laws appropriate. So around the world, many societies have put into place safeguards against the violation of rights through positive laws. These declarations often imply that their texts do not so much create rights so much as explicitly set out and acknowledge human rights in order to prevent their violation by governments.
Natural law as the basis of Privacy
Natural law is the idea that nature endows human beings with rights. These rights include everything necessary to live freely–the ability to breath, eat, work, and not least of all, to accumulate wealth so as to meet those other needs. In the Judeo-Christian world-view, God endows humans with these rights. In atheistic world-view, man’s nature endows him with these rights. Since we need to breathe, eat, as well as clothe and shelter ourselves, we have the right to obtain and accumulate. The right to privacy is ultimately the right to private property.
The Bible affirms the right to privacy in the Ten Commandments: Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness, etc. These commandments prevent other human beings and associations of human beings such as gangs, criminal syndicates, multi-national corporations, and governments, from violating private property rights.
Banking privacy and the Castle Doctrine
The concept of privacy has its basis in private ownership. If the authorization of the king to come into your house and make an inventory of your goods implies two basic premises: (1) the king is only making an inventory for his own purposes, in case he needs something; (2) ultimately what is in your house belongs to the king. Thus, the concept of privacy is long established in English law with the Castle Doctrine: A man’s house is his castle. The king has no business there, because what is in the castle belongs to its private owner. The limit to this rule, of course, is that if the authorities have reasonable cause to suspect that a crime has been committed, they may obtain a warrant to search the house.
Banking privacy is really thus an extension of the Castle Doctrine. The IRS has no right to know what is in the bank accounts of Canadians because we have the right to private property. Stephen Harper has procured a law written by human hands that takes away the privacy rights of certain Canadians, those with alleged ties to the United States–but he does not have the authority to do that. Privacy is a right given to us by God, enshrined on tablets of stone, written by God’s own finger.
This warrantless grab for information by the United States government in Canada is particularly foolish considering that even the Canadian government is not entitled to our bank account information except as it pertains to pertinent taxable events: e.g., dividends, interest, sales of stocks–these are reported on T5 and annual stock trading statements without also passing on the account balance or the account holdings. To obtain bank account information, even the Canadian government requires a warrant.
Fantastic!
Petros, I have missed you !
@Petros
Brilliant post! Here is post from the RenonceUSCitizenship blog that adds some additional thoughts on privacy:
https://renounceuscitizenship.wordpress.com/2014/12/27/brandeis-the-right-to-be-let-alone-is-the-most-comprehensive-and-valued-right/#comment-10525
Here is a comment from Badger:
… and yet you Brocker admins won’t switch on SSL!
USCitizenAbroad: thanks for the citation of the blog post. I think that my main contribution (by no means original) is that I link privacy to private property rights. It is hard for left-wing thinkers to do this, since on the one hand they want privacy but on the other hand they tend to denigrate greedy capitalists and the rich. I however believe that both the rich and the poor deserve the protection of law.
Expats are now despised victim class whose private property rights are being thoroughly dissed in the media today. But that is precisely why it is necessary to stand up for Eduardo Saverin–if you don’t stand up for him, then the government will trample over the poor too. So I shudder everytime so-called “rich” renunciants are villified in the media. I too have been the victim of such name calling by immoral Homelanders.
Yes, Petros, as you say. It is all true and evil and invasive. They use CBT as the excuse but the ultimate aim is for borders and citizenship to mean nothing whatsoever. Global will mean exactly that. Once the UN has their control over taxation it is game over no matter citizenry or sovereignty and that they aim to implement very soon.
@ Petros
I absolutely agree with you but I would point out that property rights were left out of Trudeau’s Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I was one of many, back then, who wanted these rights included, as they were in Diefenbaker’s Canadian Bill of Rights. We also disagreed with the process of writing the Charter. We wanted it to be written by a citizen committee rather than a government committee. Obviously our voices were not heard then, just as is the case today.
http://propertyrightsguide.ca/are-property-rights-protected-in-canadian-law/
After reading your brilliant post, Petros, what sprang to my mind was something from a newspaper editorial a couple of months ago, giving some advice to the local winners of two substantial lotteries. If memory serves me correctly, it warned them about an unnamed lottery winner in another unnamed place whose publicity resulted in that winner being robbed electronically by a hacker. Lottery winners agree to be publicly announced, but they might need some additional security measures in place to protect their money.
FATCA PUBLICIZES all “US persons” and their spouses while REMOVING security measures. It opens the door wide open for the US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to ransack “foreign” accounts for alleged violations. These shouldn’t cost any more than traffic violations, since the paperwork and rules are so confusing, but the penalties are exorbitant. Missing a piece of paper? Cough up ten thousand U.S. dollars!
(For perspective, that penalty is roughly the average cost of 3 semesters of university tuition in Canada.)
http://www.macleans.ca/interactive-how-canadian-tuition-fees-have-changed-in-the-last-5-years-by-province/
Natural law? I seem to recall the 30 year IRS vet and his coworkers making it a daily ritual to file any letters pertaining to that in their circular files at the end of the day, hence the wonderful relationship the IRS enjoys with US taxpayers today…
@FuriousAC
With all due respect, the people who like FATCA think that citizenship is everything, or at least that U.S. citizenship is everything. They have a very active fantasy life.
@Publius:
With all due respect as well. Those who love FATCA use CBT as an excuse because it WORKS. For now.
In the meantime the OECD is working hard to implement their global tax scheme with US taxpayer money funding the entire effort.
Fantasy is indeed the order of the day , on all fronts.
When we are told the IGA is modeled on OECD guidelines THAT is what they mean. EVERY individual and business on the planet WILL be subject to global taxation if they get their way and they are well on their way to getting their way. FATCA merely paves the way. Ploughs the road AND paves it right to Turtle Island and global dominance.
Once in place there is no one exempt from global taxation. Their glee in the minimum of 15% global tax on all individuals and busineses is evident in their policy initiatives. And they emphasize that 15% is ‘just the start’. Taking that into account along with the global warming initiative that will be included in the Pope’s Encyclical that he intends to publish later this year means every human being on the planet will be wrapped up in twine for now and forever. Our children and grandchildren will be slaves to global governance.
It is IMPERATIVE that this lawsuit go forward for it is the ONLY challenge to all this ON THIS PLANET.
(Hopefully, the RO will get their challenge initiated very quickly and their two pronged approach both legislatively and judicially will also move forward apace. ) Meaning we will be joined by other freedom loving individuals determined to slay the dragon it it’s own den and attack this beast from where it springs.
But, at this time, our lawsuit is the ONLY challenge to this evil.
Why do you think it is so hard to raise the money?
FuriousAC, As you might have read on the other thread, the RO just announced they’re raised the money needed for the lawsuit. I expect that taking on the U.S. Supreme Court is a much longer process than taking on Canada’s Supreme Court, and they’re just sorting out who will be the plaintiffs. Hence, even though our A.D.C.S. lawsuit is no longer the only challenge on the planet, it is the only one that has a chance of being heard in court as early as this year. So, you’re right, it is IMPERATIVE that this lawsuit go forward. We need to get this lawsuit launched before FATCA gets too entrenched.
Absolutely brilliant, Petros! I’m sure there were a few shocked people in your audience on Monday. Thank you for spreading the word of our situation in this unusual and wonderful way!
@Orwell
“… and yet you Brocker admins won’t switch on SSL!”
SSL will not protect your identity, it only encrypts communications between a browser client and the services being accessed, that is good but it’s just not enough. What CSIS, NSA, etc want to know, is who you are and what you are most likely doing and thinking by analyzing so-called “metadata”. Even with SSL enabled, your IP address is not hidden, and is one element of the metadata that is captured, they also capture the url that is being visited and varius other attributes. It is almost a certainty that all IP addresses that access this forum are being collected and shared among various unaccountable government agencies.
If you use an email service that knows who you are, or has acquired your end point IP address at one point or another, then you are potentially identifiable as well.
I recommend that we all use the Tor network when posting dissenting views in this forum and others. If you use email, then you must also register (through Tor) an email service that cannot identify you. Gmail is no good, registration requires a phone number, so get rid of it immediately.
Here’s a link to the Tor Browser, it’s very easy to use, but read the FAQ’s carefully so that you understand how it works, as it is very easy to compromise yourself by mistake.
https://www.torproject.org/
Disclaimer: I’m not a communications security expert, so please take the time to educate yourself as much as possible instead.
Count me amongst the 700 million who have changed their habits post Snowden (https://www.cigionline.org/articles/after-snowden-leaks-700m-move-avoid-nsa-spying). I’m up and running on encrypted email (Thunderbird with Enigmail) and encrypted chat (Pidgin with Off The Record plug-in). Surprisingly easy to implement, with a bit of assistance. I’m good til about May, at which point in time, if the Tories win the next election, my assertion of my privacy rights may be criminalised.
Yep, and it keeps getting worse. Vic Toews gets his way in the end.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/12/government-documents-reveal-canadian-telcos-envision-surveillance-ready-networks-2/
The Tories don’t need to win an election for their despotic actions to continue, the process of privacy erosion transcends all political parties that are funded well enough to stand a chance of “winning”. It sure won’t end after Harper gets the boot, why should it? No government will ever willingly give up the ability to freely spy on its subjects.
And once again Senator Rand Paul makes it clear where he stands on warrants and the need for them.
From his rebuttal to the SOTU speech tonight.
“The Constitution is clear. Politicians should not collect this information without a warrant. Warrants must be specific to an individual and there must be probable cause before government is allowed to search any American’s documents.”
And that is and has been his position. He has championed the struggle against FATCA on several fronts along with his legislation that has languished in the Senate. Now that they have a majority, perhaps we will see movement on that front as well.
…..”…IRS Commissioner John Koskinen called the portal “the start of a secure system of automated, standardized information exchanges.” ………” IDES also serves as a reminder of the contradiction between FATCA and data privacy laws of many of the FATCA signatory countries. The conflict is part of why FATCA has earned the billing by many as an extra-ordinary extra-territorial law and an example of American overreach.
Countries like the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Germany have data protection laws that restrict disclosure or transfer of individual’s personal information. ..”….
….”……. Between the implementation of FATCA reporting and the growing concern of data privacy among FATCA signatory countries, these countries are bound either for intractable conflict or the continued subrogation of the rights of those citizens also designated U.S. taxpayers (an unfortunate result for dual citizens with minimal U.S. ties)….”…
http://crimeinthesuites.com/world-wide-tax-web-fatca-data-sharing-goes-online/
@FuriousAC
Last I checked… Rand Paul’s bill regarding Fatca has been marked in the gov’t database as *died* so I am not what the procedure is if he brings it up again…
‘David Cameron seeks cooperation of US president over encryption crackdown
PM to ask Barack Obama to put pressure on US internet companies to work more closely with UK intelligence agencies’
Nicholas Watt and Patrick Wintour
The Guardian, Thursday 15 January 2015
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/15/david-cameron-ask-us-barack-obama-help-tracking-islamist-extremists-online
http://www.cnet.com/news/uk-to-seek-obamas-help-in-accessing-user-data-from-us-firms/
‘UK to seek Obama’s help in accessing user data from US firms
Prime Minister David Cameron is expected to ask for help getting US firms to make user data accessible to UK intelligence agencies under a legal framework that has yet to be worked out.’
by Don Reisinger
January 15, 2015 1:34 PM PST
..”.Cameron and Obama will discuss the UK’s desire to access user data from US-based tech companies, such as Facebook and Twitter, to aid in its law enforcement strategy, The Guardian reported, citing people who claim to have knowledge of the anticipated discussions.
According to those sources, Cameron will demand that US companies store data on users and make it accessible to UK intelligence agencies to keep the country’s citizens “safe.” That accessibility would involve a new legal framework that has yet to be worked out. One government source told the Guardian that while sites like Facebook and Twitter do cooperate to some degree, the UK would like to see that cooperation increased.
Neither Facebook nor Twitter responded to a request for comment.
The prime minister’s demand could ignite even more controversy over data accessibility. Since former US National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden leaked secret documents to the press, the world has been overwhelmed with information on the extent to which the US government goes to access user data…”…