I'm just sayin', is all...

oh, I know. It's just that it's hard to demonstrate that the church was harmed when the item that was allegedly taken was worth less than a penny.

From what I gather, there was no law broken. He was just plain tacky.

Yes, I'm fully aware I'm being simplistic and silly.

It's just that it's hard to demonstrate that the church was harmed when the item that was allegedly taken was worth less than a penny.

Well, they paid less than a penny. But then they added value by turning it into Jesus.

Sometimes it's a misdemeanor, and sometimes it's a felony. I can't find an example of a crime that allows the "hate crime" enhancement that's not a felony.

I just meant in the sense that someone's reason for a particular theft (or another crime) does not inherently make it a worse crime in my mind.

Well, they paid less than a penny. But then they added value by turning it into Jesus.

So in Europe you'd have to pay VAT?

But a hate crime is essentially an act of terrorism, so the reason does matter. Burning a cross on someone's lawn, not only is a threat to whoever's lawn it was, but that entire community.

I just meant in the sense that someone's reason for a particular theft (or another crime) does not inherently make it a worse crime in my mind.

A crime intended to cow and terrify a particular group has, to my mind, a greater overall negative effect on society than one without that additional motivation.

So in Europe you'd have to pay VAT?

Is that why Europe is becoming so much less churchified than the US? Huh.

That kid should have stayed away from Catholic ceremonies. Catholics have been pretty clear about who is invited to participate in their rituals, and for him to intrude under false pretenses was disrespectful of the people involved. I don’t think that he stole the wafer but he did obtain it by misrepresenting himself.

Ideas, on the other hand, do not have an a priori right to respect. Here in the 21st century, cannibalistic rituals and magical incantations that transform one substance to another both have fallen somewhat into disrepute, so when people hear about practices that, on the surface at least, sound very similar, those practices are likely to attract criticism. Or ridicule. That doesn’t necessarily reflect hatred of a group. It’s just the marketplace of ideas.

Having wiled away some time thinking about the situation, my position is this:

The church has certain expectations about their activities and the people who participate in them. They have every right to have those expectations. I will even grant that the expectations can rise to the level of rules within the church. In this case, breaking that rule was not a crime. Even if it was (which I am by no means conceding), it was not a hate crime, because, in order to be such, the crime (usually one of violence or implied violence) must be motivated by a negative feeling or bias against the church. In this case, a non-Catholic friend wondered what a wafer looked like. Instead of going to Google, this idiot decided to keep his wafer instead of eating it at the appropriate time. Was it a dumb thing to do? Yes. Should the church be unhappy? Maybe (not a Catholic, hard to judge) Should the church be THIS unhappy as to accuse the kid of a hate crime? No.