And religious railroads can get them too?
Regards,
Shodan
Pretty sure all the religious railroads have them, yes.
Only for their Holy Rolling stock, though.
I think you’re wrong, Czarcasm … the Alabama State Legislature doesn’t have to justify their actions … they can pass any bill they want to and they don’t have to answer to anyone why they did … they only have to face the voters …
Yeah, any private organization can have a private police force when there is a written law that says they can … if someone wants to have the courts intervene, then that person has to make their case … WHY is it unconstitutional for the legislature to pass a law allowing a private organization have their own police force? …
Again I ask … what is it about preists that make them intrinsically more corrupt than politicians … [giggle] … in Alabama?
As far as I can tell from the linked article in the OP, the main reason they want actual police with badges and not security guards is deterrence:
While your disdain for democracy is duly noted, their election makes them more valid leaders. Yes there are corrupt politicians but that still smells better than corrupt priests. Unless [giggle] you think there’s no corrupt priests in Alabama.
How?
Yeah, so?
How so?
Can you or can’t you articulate how prohibiting a church form having their own police force while letting universities have their own police force interferes in any way with the free exercise of their religion?
Even then, its not a violation of the first amendment. It may be impermissible discrimination but I don’t see the first amendment angle.
You know, I am not a lawyer so maybe giving a specific church a police department will pass legal muster regarding the separation of church and state. Flirting with my sister in law isn’t cheating on my wife but I’m still not going to do it. I find the willingness to flirt with churches running police departments equally dangerous.
Give people badges and it goes to their head.
You would agree that the government may provide a connection to the city water supply to a church, right? So long as it paid the water bill?
I would also assume that you would agree that the government could not prohibit the church from connecting to the city water supply just because it is a church?
Well, this is no different. The fact that it is a church must not play any role, good or bad, in the decision whether to allow it to have a police force. That’s the crux of the First Amendment argument being made.
If the Legislature would allow a similarly situated non-religious organization to have a police force, then it must consider the church’s request by the same standards. Likewise, if it would not allow a similarly situated non-religious organization to have a police force, it may not give special favors in allowing the church to have a police force.
Take religion completely out of the picture and decide whether the secular factors suggest a police force is needed or would otherwise be allowed. That is what the Constitution requires.
Hmmm, " a similarly situated non-religious organization"? I’m trying to think of some non-religious churches. You mean like Unitarians?
I can only post it. I can’t understand it for you.
Regards,
Shodan
You can only repeat it. You cannot explain it.
You’re funny … out of one side of your mouth you say the Alabama legislature and governor are the duly elected and valid leaders … then out the other side of your mouth you say they are corrupt to the bone by passing this bill into law … so this comes down to churches having their own police force is a completely valid form of corruption … yeah … tyranny of the majority indeed …
I do think rates of corruption is less in the priesthood than in politics … there’s actually rules forbidding a priest’s lying tongue … whereas politicians have a guarantied Constitutional right to lie … but if you like the smell of a corrupt District Attorney, then I can see why you hold your position …
WTF? Where did I say they’re “corrupt to the bone”?
There is nothing saying that a priest cannot hold office. Mike Huckabee was a Baptist Minister prior to becoming Lieutenant Governor of Arkansas (though I believe he resigned as minister during the year he won election). It would not violate the Establishment Clause (which is as far as separation of church and state in the US goes).
And there are a few church campuses that are the size of small colleges - with multiple buildings for worship (usually one being for children’s church and the other being adult worship, though the children’s church can be broken out into age groups with each group getting their own smaller building) and then schools.
Did any of these organizations that have their own police force(universities, railroads etc.) just start doing this without going through proper channels to get approval first?
Forgive me if I sound crude, but aren’t there rules forbidding priests from raping little boys? which they did…and then lied about it? the mere presence of “rules” does not stop anyone from breaking them.
Is there a history of this church and its grounds being targeted? Is there a significant issue with the response times of local police? have they had entire cemeteries desecrated and vandalized? if this was a majority Muslim or Jewish community which had enough wealth to afford its own police force would the same arguments be made in favor?
Unfortunately here in America there would be protests and marches for fear of the oncoming “sharia law” of the land.
A police force by definition is granted legal authority under the auspices of the state. Since sovereign governments are the ultimate authority over a territory, any delegation of authority over some geographic subdivision of that territory must be by the permission or acquiescence of that sovereign. Although extensively refined in modern times, in principle this goes straight back to feudalism with suzerains and vassals.
In my home state of Minnesota, the University of Minnesota enjoys a special legal status because it was originally a territorial “land grant” college, and literally was here before the state government. In the case of railroads it was recognized that it was impossible to subdivide authority over the right of way between every local jurisdiction the tracks passed through, and most railroads have legal authority built into the grants and titles that establish ownership of the tracks. So while any private property can be patrolled by security guards, no one can just slap a badge on their chest and start calling themselves police.