And the list one can get from the NSA? By the way, even if that would be possible, this would not be the point. Because the intention is a different one. If somebody comes nearby, and decides to convert to Christianity to be allowed to participate, this would be what the church owner would dream of, not? But he would not be on the list. Moreover, imposing bureaucratic requirements is a nice method for making some reasonable things impossible. Do you support such ways of effectively forbidding things by imposing unrealistic bureaucratic requirements? Do you think everything is fine if something which should be allowed out of liberal principles is made impossible in such a dirty tricky way? The problem is that, as explained in the example, he is, at least from a legal point of view, not causing any disruption, not showing any disruptive behavior. I have asked about this in the case of not undressing shows in a mosque. The answer was that there is no obligation to undress them, nor should there be. So, even extremely indecent behavior would not be interrupted by the police, because it would be completely legal. And you also do not understand that entering private property in a situation where I know that the owner does not want me to enter it, for whatever reasons, is already a willful conduct. Decent people would not do such things. Insinuations about my personal preferences, which are, as usual, completely off, disposed.