5 ms·

If an employer purchased data from a scummy tracking company about the use of apps on a personal device outside work hours I'd be outraged too. Even if the comp

If an employer purchased data from a scummy tracking company about the use of apps on a personal device outside work hours I'd be outraged too. Even if the company discovered actual wrongdoing. The ends don't justify the means. a private organization doesn't get to spy on its members. They can ask you to install MDM, they can't peek in your bedroom window. We live in a society.

WillPostForFood 3y ago
It is scummy behavior to buy tracking data. But are there "outside work hours" for priests? Seems like it is an all-in kind of thing.
COGlory 3y ago
Being a priest is a vocation, not a job. There are no working hours. Their entire life must be a reflection of their beliefs.
- bigger_inside 3y ago
  interestng that pretty much every US company seems to think that of their bots, ehm, I mean, employees. I don't accept it for any company, and the church is also not entitled to convert all their people into good little bots who are 100% company man facade, 100% of the time
- themitigating 3y ago
  Is this a legal difference?
TheFreim 3y ago
There is no such thing as "outside work hours" for a priest. They are to serve as a leader for their congregation, actively engaging in behavior which is contrary to that mission should absolutely be exposed.
- kibwen 3y ago
  This is absolute nonsense. Just because some people choose not to understand the concept of work/life balance doesn't mean that the institution of the church is magically beyond reproach. Employers shouldn't get to spy on their employees, full stop. Please stop making excuses for corporate overreach.
  - joemazerino 3y ago
    It does because the Priests are consenting. It isn't a legal relationship - it is a spiritual one.
  - TheFreim 3y ago
    Being a priest isn't a "job". You don't commit to being a mere "employee" when you become a priest, just as a parent doesn't get to just decide to not care for their child because they don't like the "job" anymore. When you become a priest you vow to uphold certain teachings, standards, and practices.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - janosett 3y ago
      This is about your view of morals as they relate to religion though, right? Legally speaking priests are employees and the church is the employer. I think our government system should treat them as such. Whether it’s right or wrong from the perspective of the church or followers of the religion should be separate from our rules about privacy.
      - TheFreim 3y ago
        Thank you for your thoughtful response, here are a couple of items for your consideration. > This is about your view of morals as they relate to religion though, right? Legally speaking priests are employees and the church is the employer. Everyone involved in this discussion is positing moral views that are independent from the current law. It's apparently legal for companies to sell their users personal data, just as a priest may be legally considered an "employee" even though I don't think that is what a priest is. > I think our government system should treat them as such. > Whether it’s right or wrong from the perspective of the church or followers of the religion should be separate from our rules about privacy. I would disagree that the government should treat priests as employees, but regrettably I think this won't be a fruitful venue for discussing this since it's likely that we have too many different priors in this area that would take too long to hash out. In terms of how privacy rules should work, I am generally inclined to support generalized prohibitions on selling/distributing user data without an explicit voluntary opt-in. Where I likely differ is in that I don't believe that in principle it's wrong to use available data in ways that I see as being moral. If a company has data that would prove one of their users is a serial killer I'd say they'd have the obligation to use that to help the killer get caught, but I also think generally in order to prevent greater societal evils that user data should be protected. I'll try an example, hopefully it's not too strained. I think spying on people in their homes would be bad, it would be detrimental to familial privacy and unity among other things. But if someone happens to see into someone's house and witness a crime I wouldn't have any issue with that crime being reported. So I can say we should have laws preventing peeping toms/protecting privacy in homes while also not seeing every instantiation of acquiring information as being immoral in and of itself. Hope that makes sense, I'm a bit scrambled right now regrettably.
janalsncm 3y ago
I agree with you but there is some kind of irony about priests who ostensibly believe an omniscient being watches their every move expecting privacy from digital surveillance. We are in the process of building a god of sorts (omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent) and I’m not sure it’s a good thing.

WillPostForFood 3y ago

It is scummy behavior to buy tracking data. But are there "outside work hours" for priests? Seems like it is an all-in kind of thing.

COGlory 3y ago

Being a priest is a vocation, not a job. There are no working hours. Their entire life must be a reflection of their beliefs.

bigger_inside 3y ago
interestng that pretty much every US company seems to think that of their bots, ehm, I mean, employees. I don't accept it for any company, and the church is also not entitled to convert all their people into good little bots who are 100% company man facade, 100% of the time
themitigating 3y ago
Is this a legal difference?

TheFreim 3y ago

There is no such thing as "outside work hours" for a priest. They are to serve as a leader for their congregation, actively engaging in behavior which is contrary to that mission should absolutely be exposed.

kibwen 3y ago
This is absolute nonsense. Just because some people choose not to understand the concept of work/life balance doesn't mean that the institution of the church is magically beyond reproach. Employers shouldn't get to spy on their employees, full stop. Please stop making excuses for corporate overreach.
- joemazerino 3y ago
  It does because the Priests are consenting. It isn't a legal relationship - it is a spiritual one.
- TheFreim 3y ago
  Being a priest isn't a "job". You don't commit to being a mere "employee" when you become a priest, just as a parent doesn't get to just decide to not care for their child because they don't like the "job" anymore. When you become a priest you vow to uphold certain teachings, standards, and practices.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - janosett 3y ago
    This is about your view of morals as they relate to religion though, right? Legally speaking priests are employees and the church is the employer. I think our government system should treat them as such. Whether it’s right or wrong from the perspective of the church or followers of the religion should be separate from our rules about privacy.
    - TheFreim 3y ago
      Thank you for your thoughtful response, here are a couple of items for your consideration. > This is about your view of morals as they relate to religion though, right? Legally speaking priests are employees and the church is the employer. Everyone involved in this discussion is positing moral views that are independent from the current law. It's apparently legal for companies to sell their users personal data, just as a priest may be legally considered an "employee" even though I don't think that is what a priest is. > I think our government system should treat them as such. > Whether it’s right or wrong from the perspective of the church or followers of the religion should be separate from our rules about privacy. I would disagree that the government should treat priests as employees, but regrettably I think this won't be a fruitful venue for discussing this since it's likely that we have too many different priors in this area that would take too long to hash out. In terms of how privacy rules should work, I am generally inclined to support generalized prohibitions on selling/distributing user data without an explicit voluntary opt-in. Where I likely differ is in that I don't believe that in principle it's wrong to use available data in ways that I see as being moral. If a company has data that would prove one of their users is a serial killer I'd say they'd have the obligation to use that to help the killer get caught, but I also think generally in order to prevent greater societal evils that user data should be protected. I'll try an example, hopefully it's not too strained. I think spying on people in their homes would be bad, it would be detrimental to familial privacy and unity among other things. But if someone happens to see into someone's house and witness a crime I wouldn't have any issue with that crime being reported. So I can say we should have laws preventing peeping toms/protecting privacy in homes while also not seeing every instantiation of acquiring information as being immoral in and of itself. Hope that makes sense, I'm a bit scrambled right now regrettably.

janalsncm 3y ago

I agree with you but there is some kind of irony about priests who ostensibly believe an omniscient being watches their every move expecting privacy from digital surveillance. We are in the process of building a god of sorts (omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent) and I’m not sure it’s a good thing.