# Should churches be able to have their own state-sanctioned police force? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 11, 2017, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959 "2017-03-11T22:09:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/201 "2017-03-15T17:52:51Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No it doesn’t. And the fact that you are not presenting any new arguments means that your bare assertion is arguable.I don’t need a leg - I have the Constitution. And we are talking about Presbyterians here, not Roman Catholics. > > If the issues with private police are enough to ban all private police, then we as a society can ban all private police. Since they are not enough, the First Amendment means that we cannot discriminate against religious organizations by banning private police for them but not others. > > Regards, > Shodan So this bill is totally unnecessary? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/202 "2017-03-15T18:03:10Z")
Yes, or least it should be. There should be no higher barriers to a religious organization creating a private police force than for any other similar organization. No doubt part of the problem is the “religion is icky” factor that some people think overrides the Constitution. And that some liberals think the First Amendment is there to marginalize the rights of religious people. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/203 "2017-03-15T18:21:14Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Yes, or least it should be. There should be no higher barriers to a religious organization creating a private police force than for any other similar organization. Apparently there are a bunch of Republicans and church goers who think they know better than you-The nerve! ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/204 "2017-03-15T18:34:10Z")
To reiterate what I said earlier one important distinction between private security guards and police is _ **jurisdiction** _: the geographic region of a police department’s authority is sharply defined by state law. Colleges get a pass because of precedents going back to Middle Ages England about their being quasi-independent. Railroads get a pass because of the necessity of policing a jurisdiction 100 feet wide and hundreds of miles long. In my home state the State Fair grounds get to have their own police because of the seasonal nature of the population: near-zero most of the time, hundreds of thousands at peak times. But unless this church is operating what amounts to an unincorporated town, consisting not just of the house of worship but residences and businesses all in a compact geographic area, then I don’t see why they should have a separate jurisdiction from their surrounding community. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/205 "2017-03-15T18:49:35Z")
For what it’s worth, I think religion _is_ icky, but I can’t see an inherent problem with a police department (bound to the same regulations and training requirements as police departments elsewhere in the state) whose jurisdiction was a church “campus”. The problem I _do_ have is trying to picture a church “campus” that was large enough to justify a local police department, but that’s just me being compelled to consider what is practical. Incidentally, does separation of church and state in the U.S. extend as far as saying a priest cannot hold elected office? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/206 "2017-03-15T18:50:50Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The First Amendment also covers freedom of religion. OK, can you please describe how your free exercise of religion is inhibited by not letting you have a police force with police powers? > [@](#): > > So it would be acceptable to say that white-owned businesses can create their own police, but not black-owned? That’s not discrimination? > > Regards, > Shodan Of course that’s discrimination. I can point to the statute that pretty clearly makes it illegal to prohibit blacks from doing what whites can do. Can you point to the law that says that I cannot prohibit churches from doing what universities can do? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/207 "2017-03-15T18:53:12Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > the First Amendment means that we cannot discriminate against religious organizations by banning private police for them but not others. > > Regards, > Shodan Can you point to the exact words you are talking about? IOW, cite? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/208 "2017-03-15T18:54:12Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Incidentally, does separation of church and state in the U.S. extend as far as saying a priest cannot hold elected office? Sure she can-but she’ll be representing everyone in the district and not just her fellow churchians. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/209 "2017-03-15T18:55:35Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > For what it’s worth, I think religion _is_ icky, but I can’t see an inherent problem with a police department (bound to the same regulations and training requirements as police departments elsewhere in the state) whose jurisdiction was a church “campus”. The problem I _do_ have is trying to picture a church “campus” that was large enough to justify a local police department, but that’s just me being compelled to consider what is practical. > > Incidentally, does separation of church and state in the U.S. extend as far as saying a priest cannot hold elected office? [Robert Drinan - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Drinan) comes to mind. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/210 "2017-03-15T18:57:31Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Yes, or least it should be. There should be no higher barriers to a religious organization creating a private police force than for any other similar organization. How similar? Any 501(c)3? Any organized group? Anyone with a large plot of land? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/211 "2017-03-15T19:01:43Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Sure she can-but she’ll be representing everyone in the district and not just her fellow churchians. Sure, and if a priest has an official position over a police department, I’m okay with the department enforcing civil laws (and _only_ civil laws) within its jurisdiction, as well as conforming to civil laws in its hiring and promotion policies. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/212 "2017-03-15T19:06:43Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Sure, and if a priest has an official position over a police department, I’m okay with the department enforcing civil laws (and _only_ civil laws) within its jurisdiction, as well as conforming to civil laws in its hiring and promotion policies. Cart before the horse. First you have to show that a private police force where there already exists a _public_ police force is justified. It has already been point out why there are separate railroad police and why _some_ colleges/universities have their own police-in the same way this idea of _this particular church_ having the same privilege must also be justified. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/213 "2017-03-15T19:28:54Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Cart before the horse. First you have to show that a private police force where there already exists a _public_ police force is justified. It has already been point out why there are separate railroad police and why _some_ colleges/universities have their own police-in the same way this idea of _this particular church_ having the same privilege must also be justified. Well, yes, I mentioned having trouble picturing a church “campus” that was physically large enough (i.e. the size of a large college campus or a trainyard) to justify local cops. I suppose Scientology’s 700-acre “Gold Base” might qualify, though I doubt they want the civil oversight that comes with having a police department. I don’t see a problem with adding a number of geographical requirements: 1. Proposed jurisdiction must be completely contiguous 2. Proposed jurisdiction must have a minimum total land area of, say, 300 acres 3. Proposed jurisdiction must consist of at least 10 distinct structures with at least 200 acres of total usable floorspace, or at least 200 acres of passable roadways, runways, railroads and/or docking facilities I gather that covers universities, railyards, airports and seaports, i.e. the facility has to be large enough and have enough developed infrastructure to be worth protecting. The numbers are arbitrary, of course, but I’m not adding a requirement that the complex have a specific function, let alone barring one with religious intent. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/214 "2017-03-15T19:42:12Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > OK, can you please describe how your free exercise of religion is inhibited by not letting you have a police force with police powers? Discriminating against religious organizations is interfering with the free exercise of religion. Allowing private organizations to have their own police but preventing religious organizations from having them for no other reason than because they are religious, is discrimination. Therefore preventing religious organizations from doing what other private organizations can do is a violation of the First Amendment. QED. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/215 "2017-03-15T19:46:10Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Discriminating against religious organizations is interfering with the free exercise of religion. Allowing private organizations to have their own police but preventing religious organizations from having them for no other reason than because they are religious, is discrimination. Therefore preventing religious organizations from doing what other private organizations can do is a violation of the First Amendment. QED. Only if all private organizations are now allowed to have their own private police police forces. Are they? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/216 "2017-03-15T19:47:39Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Incidentally, does separation of church and state in the U.S. extend as far as saying a priest cannot hold elected office? > [@US Constitution](#): > > … no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. So, no. A church may forbid its members or clergy to hold office, but the government may not. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/217 "2017-03-15T19:50:55Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Only if all private organizations are now allowed to have their own private police police forces. No, only if private organizations are allowed or prevented from having their own police under the same circumstances, and subject to the same laws. Otherwise it would be religious discrimination, which is forbidden by the First Amendment. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/218 "2017-03-15T19:59:37Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > How similar? Any 501(c)3? Any organized group? Anyone with a large plot of land? Any organization that meets the criteria that some private hospitals, private schools, and railroads have met, whatever those criteria are, should be considered. I’m not sure exactly why those three appear to be the main organizations that have private police forces but it doesn’t appear that religious affiliation is a criteria. Certainly private universities affiliated with a religious order, like Notre Dame, have them. Some of the hospitals with quasi-police forces are religious, but I don’t think those forces quite rise to the level that university police are at. I don’t think anyone is saying that by default, churches should be granted police forces if they want them. But the point is that some criteria was used to determine that university, hospitals, and railroads can apply for police forces. Whatever criteria is applicable should apply to institutions without religion being a factor. I think without a resident population there is no need for this church to have a police force, but railroads don’t have that either. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/219 "2017-03-15T20:03:44Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > I think without a resident population there is no need for this church to have a police force, but railroads don’t have that either. As has already been pointed out, railroads are a special case because the jurisdiction is a few feet wide and hundreds of miles long-few(if any) police departments can carry that particular burden. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2017, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959/220 "2017-03-15T20:46:54Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, only if private organizations are allowed or prevented from having their own police under the same circumstances, and subject to the same laws. Otherwise it would be religious discrimination, which is forbidden by the First Amendment. > > Regards, > Shodan A religious university of any flavor can get a police force. The circumstances required are being a university not that it be a secular institution. There’s no religious discrimination. This is discrimination based on the function and nature of the institution. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-churches-be-able-to-have-their-own-state-sanctioned-police-force/781959.md?page=12)