Non religious, Atheist, New Atheist, Humanist, Mammon worshipper, Buddhist

[Owlswing]

Sorry, but I am a little baffled by the highlighted comment as I was under the impression, from the letter I have received and as noted by you, that the Census form was available on the internet - which would seem to have no limit in the size or the number of questions and answers.

Owlswing

)O(

P S - Or have they had thousands of Vlads complaining that it is unChristian to change the question at the behest of non-Christian humanists?

Owlswing

)O(

[ProfessorDavey]

Sorry, but I am a little baffled by the highlighted comment as I was under the impression, from the letter I have received and as noted by you, that the Census form was available on the internet - which would seem to have no limit in the size or the number of questions and answers.

Owlswing

)O(

Yes you are right - it is complete nonsense, but the ONS decision is largely based on the amount of space the question takes up on a paper form. This from the official report of the ONS on decision making for the question (with my emphasis).

'The testing concluded that the question “What is your religion?” best met the requirement of collecting good quality data on religious affiliation within the space constraints of the census questionnaire.'

And in the official report leading up to the 2011 census the ONS indicated that there wasn't enough space for two questions on religion, therefore ruling out any neutral yes/no starting question with a follow-up question for those that answer yes to 'Do you have a religious belief' or equivalent neutral starter-for-ten.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

'The testing concluded that the question “What is your religion?” best met the requirement of collecting good quality data on religious affiliation within the space constraints of the census questionnaire.'

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

'The testing concluded that the question “What is your religion?” best met the requirement of collecting good quality data on religious affiliation within the space constraints of the census questionnaire.'

The question "have you stopped beating your wife yet? (Y/N)" best meets the requirement of telling me about your wife beating habits within the space constraints of my questionnaire.

So that's all right then right?
 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

have they had thousands of Vlads complaining that it is unChristian to change the question at the behest of non-Christian humanists?
Owlswing

I'm rather amused by the idea of you calling religious people ''Vlads.'' The boring reality of this issue is that it is the Humanists who are complaining here.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I'm rather amused by the idea of you calling religious people ''Vlads.'' The boring reality of this issue is that it is the Humanists who are complaining here.

Actually the boring reality is that there are people here who think that more accurate data is more useful than less accurate data, but hey...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Actually the boring reality is that there are people here who think that more accurate data is more useful than less accurate data, but hey...

I would take that to the ONS who disagree that that is what you are doing with respect to the census rather than take the failure of Dawkins and Copson, Watson et al out on little old me.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I would take that to the ONS who disagree that that is what you are doing with respect to the census rather than take the failure of Dawkins and Copson, Watson et al out on little old me.

Little old you is the one pushing the notion that asking a question biased toward false positives because of space constraints on the form is a good idea, so you're the one being corrected on this forum.   

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Little old you is the one pushing the notion that asking a question biased toward false positives because of space constraints on the form is a good idea, so you're the one being corrected on this forum.

I'm afraid I rather trust the consideration of the ONS in their judgment of what Humanist UK are after.
Perhaps of more concern than me conveying that is the comparisons and preference for the British social attitudes survey expressed by Humanist UK. I have never received anything from them, whereas everyone hears from the census. Documents for planning policy are more dependent on census information than any indices of Attitude. Preference for the survey then is to prefer something less accurate than the census aside from them being two different things.

Once again majoring on beliefs misses actual affiliation....as has been pointed out by the ONS.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I'm afraid I rather trust the consideration of the ONS in their judgment of what Humanist UK are after.

What is it that you think the ONS claims humanists to be “after”?
 

Perhaps of more concern than me conveying that is the comparisons and preference for the British social attitudes survey expressed by Humanist UK. I have never received anything from them, whereas everyone hears from the census. Documents for planning policy are more dependent on census information than any indices of Attitude. Preference for the survey then is to prefer something less accurate than the census aside from them being two different things.

What on earth are you trying to say in that dog’s breakfast of a comment? Census results inform social policy; the framing of one question in particular on the census form is biased towards false positives, apparently becasue of space constraints.

Why is that a good idea? 

Once again majoring on beliefs misses actual affiliation....as has been pointed out by the ONS.

Once again, no it doesn’t for the reasons that have been explained to you but you continue to ignore.

PS You didn’t answer my question “have you stopped beating your wife yet? (Y/N)”. Why is that? 

[Gordon]

The question 'What is your religion?' seems like a leading question, since it treats the answer 'None' as being part of the same paradigm as is, say, 'Christianity': and that is clearly wrong since 'None' isn't a choice of religion.

Perhaps using a little more paper is justified so as to avoid suspect data, which would be the case if religious affiliation is over-estimated.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The question 'What is your religion?' seems like a leading question, since it treats the answer 'None' as being part of the same paradigm as is, say, 'Christianity': and that is clearly wrong since 'None' isn't a choice of religion.

Perhaps using a little more paper is justified so as to avoid suspect data, which would be the case if religious affiliation is over-estimated.

But you are missing the point which is that the ONS state that the humanist formulations and definitions are different to those which the ONS are using.

So for instance Humanists are not interested in whether people attend church or see themselves as cultural christians but whether they truly believe in whatever religion. That is of interest to evangelicals and humanists but it is not what the ONS regard as defining affiliation. The Humanists have an agenda and it doesn't match with the ONS.

As I said, the Humanist definitions are too belief focussed for what the ONS need.

The ONS acknowledge imperfection but classify other formulations less optimal.
As to the performance of people on here........strong on humanist polemic and the ideal of no religion, weak on challenging the ONS formulations and their justifications.

[Owlswing]

What is it that you think the ONS claims humanists to be “after”?

He doesn't think that they are "after" anything! What he is after is being a non-stop wind-up merchant trying to find out just how long he can shovel tons and tons of meaningless bull-shit before everyone else decides to totally ignore him and his religious bullshittery!

PS You didn’t answer my question “have you stopped beating your wife yet? (Y/N)”. Why is that?

Of course, he didn't answer your question! The answer is simple. HE doesn't beat his wife! SHE beats the crap out of him because she is just as fed up with his religious bull-shit as many here are! And the sooner he hies himself off to a monastery the better for all concerned - and an end to a stream of bloody stupid pseudonyms!

Owlswing

)O(

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

What is it that you think the ONS claims humanists to be “after”?

This article is very informative on that subject. The author though is a bit on the '' It's an Establishment conspiracy'' side and makes IMHO a bit of a ''slippery slope'' argument involving Farage co-opting religion....(Actually he managed to co-opt a whole country). It's clear though that Humanist UK and ONS are after two separate things.

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/census-2021-form-uk-filling-out-questions-religion-918218

[jeremyp]

Are you saying that people who only claim have some affiliation with a religion have been lying on the census?

Yes if the claim is false.

As far as I can see the census questions obtain the information useful for planning and policy and those proposed by Humanist UK don't.

I thought we were talking about answering "no religion" if you have no religion, not changing the census, which is a bit late now.

In other words when people say they are not religious that could cover up use of churches for baptisms, weddings and funerals, attendance at church events, use of church schools, use of church halls etc.

You're not religious just because you go to a baptism or funeral in a church. You, of all people, should know the difference between The Church and churches.

[jeremyp]

Sorry, but I am a little baffled by the highlighted comment as I was under the impression, from the letter I have received and as noted by you, that the Census form was available on the internet - which would seem to have no limit in the size or the number of questions and answers.

Owlswing

)O(

But it's also available as a paper form if you don't want to, or can't, fill it in on line.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes if the claim is false.
I thought we were talking about answering "no religion" if you have no religion, not changing the census, which is a bit late now.

If you read Dunt the aim of the census is to collect cultural information which can be put to policy use. It is also for self identification. When people say they have no religion, is that a) strictly true in the sense of cultural and affiliative information or just to the belief aspect ? If the latter then that is not as useful for the purposes of the ONS.

You're not religious just because you go to a baptism or funeral in a church. You, of all people, should know the difference between The Church and churches.

I'm perfectly aware, Jeremy, of that but the ONS aren't really bothered about Body of Christ , apostolic or any other theology or even the notion that non belief should mean the end of any identification with religion as culture and practice but the ONS are interested in the other two aspects of religious affiliation that Dunt talks about.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

This article is very informative on that subject. The author though is a bit on the '' It's an Establishment conspiracy'' side and makes IMHO a bit of a ''slippery slope'' argument involving Farage co-opting religion....(Actually he managed to co-opt a whole country). It's clear though that Humanist UK and ONS are after two separate things.

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/census-2021-form-uk-filling-out-questions-religion-918218

Have you actually read the article? It sets out exactly the problem – a question biased toward false positives about beliefs (rather than about just cultural affiliation) will justify unwarranted belief-based policies. Are you seriously suggesting that there won’t be those who will use the results to claim “see, we’re still a Christian country” when many ticking the CofE (or whichever) box won’t have the beliefs part at all?

Asking the question neutrally (eg, “Do you have religious beliefs? If yes, go to question 2; if no, skip question 2”) produces a very different picture of the religiosity of the respondents. That’s the point.     

[jeremyp]

If you read Dunt the aim of the census is to collect cultural information which can be put to policy use. It is also for self identification. When people say they have no religion, is that a) strictly true in the sense of cultural and affiliative information or just to the belief aspect ? If the latter then that is not as useful for the purposes of the ONS.

What good is it for the government to know that I still occasionally go to church? The government isn't responsible for building churches (or mosques, temples and synagogues). If they are looking for a cultural picture of England and Wales, I don't see anything wrong with the current question and answering it truthfully.

I'm perfectly aware, Jeremy, of that but the ONS aren't really bothered about Body of Christ , apostolic or any other theology or even the notion that non belief should mean the end of any identification with religion as culture and practice but the ONS are interested in the other two aspects of religious affiliation that Dunt talks about.

They are bothered about who is a Christian (Muslim, Sikh, Jew, Hindu, not religious etc). I am not a Christian. If I answered Christian or CodE on the census, it would be a lie, despite the fact that I have been to church a number of times in the last year and still help out at my parents' church summer fete. What was it your Bible said about bearing false witness?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I'm perfectly aware, Jeremy, of that but the ONS aren't really bothered about Body of Christ , apostolic or any other theology…

Then they should be if the results of their poorly framed question will be used to justify public policies that have theology at their heart.

[jeremyp]

Vlad,

Have you actually read the article? It sets out exactly the problem – a question biased toward false positives about beliefs (rather than about just cultural affiliation) will justify unwarranted belief-based policies. Are you seriously suggesting that there won’t be those who will use the results to claim “see, we’re still a Christian country” when many ticking the CofE (or whichever) box won’t have the beliefs part at all?

Asking the question neutrally (eg, “Do you have religious beliefs? If yes, go to question 2; if no, skip question 2”) produces a very different picture of the religiosity of the respondents. That’s the point.     

|Well this is interesting

In 2001, the Muslim Council of Britain wanted a better sense of how many Muslims there were in Britain. You can’t really do it with ethnicity data because Muslims come from all over the world – Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Africa and elsewhere. So they pushed for a question on religion in the census and the New Labour government agreed.

I did not realise that, in previous censuses, the question wasn't even asked. This whole thing is beginning to look like a pissing contest between the Muslims and the Christians to see who has the most followers. Vlad is just trying to drum up the numbers for his side.

[Owlswing]

I did not realise that, in previous censuses, the question wasn't even asked. This whole thing is beginning to look like a pissing contest between the Muslims and the Christians to see who has the most followers. Vlad is just trying to drum up the numbers for his side.

Especially in the way that the number of people professing to be Christian seems to be falling by the month!

Owlswing

)O(

 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Have you actually read the article? It sets out exactly the problem – a question biased toward false positives about beliefs (rather than about just cultural affiliation) will justify unwarranted belief-based policies. Are you seriously suggesting that there won’t be those who will use the results to claim “see, we’re still a Christian country” when many ticking the CofE (or whichever) box won’t have the beliefs part at all?

Asking the question neutrally (eg, “Do you have religious beliefs? If yes, go to question 2; if no, skip question 2”) produces a very different picture of the religiosity of the respondents. That’s the point.     

I have read the article....and I think it very informative about why we have wound up where we are namely the ONS interested in self identification and cultural and practical aspects rather than the almost similar interest of evangelicals and Humanists namely beliefs. The ONS have decided that this information is of less utility to them.

They are less interested in the issue of unbelief or vague theistic belief equals no religion than what people self identify with.

So I'm afraid what you say is ''The point'',............Isn't.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

|Well this is interesting
I did not realise that, in previous censuses, the question wasn't even asked. This whole thing is beginning to look like a pissing contest between the Muslims and the Christians to see who has the most followers. Vlad is just trying to drum up the numbers for his side.

For me, getting more people to be cultural christians has no meaning and does not make one saved.
Surely the point is that it in this context it is the non believers that are trying to drum up numbers for their side and the beef is that their focus on beliefs rather than the cultural and practice aspects isn't shared by the ONS who are less interested in a creating Humanist paradise on Earth.......which has religious overtones anyway.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I have read the article....and I think it very informative about why we have wound up where we are namely the ONS interested in self identification and cultural and practical aspects rather than the almost similar interest of evangelicals and Humanists namely beliefs. The ONS have decided that this information is of less utility to them.

They are less interested in the issue of unbelief or vague theistic belief equals no religion than what people self identify with.

If you have read it then you will have seen this part then:

“When it came to the actual contents of the Christian faith – the “belief” part of religion – the results plummeted. Just 34 per cent said it was because they “believe in the teachings of Christianity”. Only 27 per cent said they “believe that Jesus Christ was a real person who died and came back to life, and was the son of God”. When it came to practice, the numbers fell even further. Most people who ticked Christian either never attended a place of worship or did so less than once a year.

This is why conservative politicians and religious leaders love the census question. They know it is intended to provide data on cultural self-identification. But they can misuse it to make an argument about belief.

“These results confirm that we remain a faithful nation,” Arun Arora, former director of communications for the Archbishop’s Council, said after the 2011 Census. Religious authorities then used the data to demand continued religious programming on the BBC and government support for church buildings and faith schools. It’s deployed to set patterns of provision of state-funded pastoral care and make decisions about the school syllabus.”

So I'm afraid what you say is ''The point'',............Isn't.

Yes it is – see above.