God told him to. It's unleavened bread, except when, as was also true at the church I went to in south Georgia, the host is cubes of Wonderbread.

was it a catholic church? I'm baptist, and we believe that any bread will do as long as its properly consecrated. Of course we also stay in our seats and don't care if you're peckish, not baptist.

IOMostlyUnrelatedN, The White House is Cursed!

For instance, I believe there presently is a divine curse on the White House. Why? Because President George W. Bush placed the Koran in that house's library. The occasion was a much-celebrated Ramadan dinner where both Muslim males and females were guests.

With much fanfare Mr. Bush announced his placing the Koran in the White House library.

Taking biblical data into consideration, one can conclude that God was very angry at that move. I believe He has brought a curse the White House because of placing the Koran alongside the Bible in the White House library. God cannot tolerate those who place other gods alongside Him.

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.

And again, this is what make the whole concept difficult for me. You seem to be saying that if this same act (taking the wafer) was motivated because the guy hated the Church it should be treated differently. Personally, as a juror, I don't want to have to make those distinctions based on what may or may not have been in someone's mind.

To go back to Trudy's example, if you stab someone in an argument, maybe you have been thinking about it for weeks, maybe it was partly because they were gay, black, etc., I really can't know.

If you want to make burning a cross a specific crime with a specific punishment (for historical reasons, as representing a threat, whatever), I don't have a problem with that.

God cannot tolerate those who place other gods alongside Him.

Dumbass, read your bible. It's "Thou shalt have no other gods before me", not alongside or behind

I don't think The Church accused him of a hate crime though, did they? I think it was just The Catholic League.

I just did a quick jump through Google, and so far (I haven't checked past the first page of two different searches) it looks like the only person bloviating about hate crime is Donohue, who is so very epically not The Church.

Of course we also stay in our seats and don't care if you're peckish, not baptist.

My Presbyterian experience matches yours. I loved those little baby shot glasses. And the fact that my teenage self and siblings would take the wine and throw it back like a shot when we thought we could get away with it was certainly also disrespectful. So?

God cannot tolerate those who place other gods alongside Him.

Pleasepleaseplease let whoever informs this moron that the god in the Koran is the same one from the Bible have a running video camera when they do so.

To go back to Trudy's example, if you stab someone in an argument, maybe you have been thinking about it for weeks, maybe it was partly because they were gay, black, etc., I really can't know.

Well, there are trials and reasonable doubt and stuff. You don't just determine a hate crime willy nilly.

If you want to make burning a cross a specific crime with a specific punishment (for historical reasons, as representing a threat, whatever), I don't have a problem with that.

Maybe a better example is this: Beating someone to death is a crime with a punishment. Beating Matthew Sheppard to death was that crime and a threat to the gay community.

And again, this is what make the whole concept difficult for me. You seem to be saying that if this same act (taking the wafer) was motivated because the guy hated the Church it should be treated differently.

Yes, that's what makes it a hate crime. If you concede that taking the wafer was a crime, you would add additional punishment because the motivation for the crime was bias.

Personally, as a juror, I don't want to have to make those distinctions based on what may or may not have been in someone's mind.

but, that's exactly the job of the jury. You listen to the evidence on both sides and decide if you think that the crime was motivated by bias or not.