Why should it care about the religion of man, then?
For that matter, why should it care about the invitation of man?
If there are rules a vampire must follow, and those rules can be satisfied through the agency of human beings, having been interpreted by human beings, then we have to consider what a human being means by invitation.
If a 4-year-old invites a vampire into his parents’ house, does that count? It’s not his house, either. If you think that a vampire can enter on the invitation of a 4-year-old then you must concede that people other than the owner can invite someone in. If you think that invitation is not valid, then you must concede that a vampire respects a hierarchy of rights.
I think that the state asserts a right to invite other people into your house which supersedes your right to prevent them. We call that overriding invitation a warrant.
Why should it care about the religion of man, then?
For that matter, why should it care about the invitation of man?
If there are rules a vampire must follow, and those rules can be satisfied through the agency of human beings, having been interpreted by human beings, then we have to consider what a human being means by invitation.
If a 4-year-old invites a vampire into his parents’ house, does that count? It’s not his house, either. If you think that a vampire can enter on the invitation of a 4-year-old then you must concede that people other than the owner can invite someone in. If you think that invitation is not valid, then you must concede that a vampire respects a hierarchy of rights.
I think that the state asserts a right to invite other people into your house which supersedes your right to prevent them. We call that overriding invitation a warrant.