If you think it proper for an on-the-clock government official to solicit on behalf of their religion then I wonder how people would act if the situation were reversed?

What if the cop was the druid and the plaintiffs were the Christians? Imagine getting pulled over for a burned out brake light and the officer, seeing a cross hanging from your rear view mirror and seeing your agitation, suggests that you would be better served by the teachings of his religion?

If we’re concerned with a cop’s freedom to exercise their faith, what other actions will we have to allow under other guaranteed rights? Let’s say a driver with a bumper sticker supporting Pres. Bush is pulled over for a minor traffic violation. Should we allow police officers, during the course of their duties, to comment to drivers about why they shouldn’t support Pres. Bush? Freedom of speech, isn’t it?

The man, once he begins work as a police officer, transforms into an agent of the government. With very limited exceptions, his rights are mitigated by the authority his position holds. Do you really want people with the authority of levying fines or imprisonment have the freedom to confront you about your faith, your lifestyle, your political ideals? The officer clearly meant well, but he failed to respect the boundaries between his life as a private citizen and deacon of his curch, and his life as an officer of the law.

I’m not sure how to express the point any plainer. If we still cannot agree that the officer’s judgement was poor in this case then I’ll be very interested to read your response to the questions I pose above.

It’s one thing for a government official to suggest someone find guidance from a higher power, it is another thing for that officer to suggest his own church and pastor. What if the officer were Islamic and used his time in a government uniform, on the government dime, to encourage people to visit his mosque?

Maybe the woman does need spiritual help but the officer went about it in the wrong way.