Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

Brown Bomber

Cabaal wrote: »

Its scary that this guy actually believes what he is saying is factual

What exactly is he saying that is "scaring you"?

"In my/our DNA" is a figure of speech.

Aren't Labour making moves against the church in schools and hospitals, Councillors and Chaplains for example? Isn't Labour's Ivana Bacik the darling of Atheist Ireland? In any case Gilmore is a disgraced liar motivated by self-interest.

Gilmore, who has led calls against a second referendum, has told the Embassy separately that he fully expects, and would support, holding a second referendum in 2009. He explained his public posture of opposition to a second referendum as "politically necessary" for the time being.
http://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08DUBLIN433_a.html

What else? Oh yeah, according to our own census we are as a nation over 90% Christian.

Days 298

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What exactly is he saying that is "scaring you"?

"In my/our DNA" is a figure of speech.

Implying that being Christian is a part of the Irish identity and ingrained in society. Its not in the modern Irish one anyway.It also imply we should not remove it. When their benchmark is the Arab autocracies you realise what a f*cked up country we would still live in if these headcases had their way.

Aren't Labour making moves against the church in schools and hospitals, Councillors and Chaplains for example? Isn't Labour's Ivana Bacik the darling of Atheist Ireland? In any case Gilmore is a disgraced liar motivated by self-interest.

And correction it is the Catholic Hierarchy and its minions consisting of OAPs are motivated by self interest. Wanting non denominational healthcare and schooling choice for other citizens is hardly self interest. Its actually quite considerate and progressive.

What else? Oh yeah, according to our own census we are as a nation over 90% Christian.

I've heard that before.... generally from an OAP giving out about any change of any kind in the country.

No matter how much religion and its fundamentalists kick and screams the average Irish citizen, religious or atheist, is in favour of and never objecting to change to progress society and make it more inclusive. One of the biggest problems is how far behind and slow moving our politicians are.

Brown Bomber

Days 298 wrote: »

Implying that being Christian is a part of the Irish identity and ingrained in society. Its not in the modern Irish one anyway.

Can't believe that you would try and deny the centuries old roots of Christianity in Ireland and it's significant role in what was to become our nations evolution

Days 298 wrote: »

It also imply we should not remove it.

Not neccessarily.

Days 298 wrote: »

Not my religion. Let me turn this around on you. What compromises would you (numerically insignificant minority) be prepared to make with the people you are referring to in negative terms repeatedly
who are officially the overwhelming majority?

Couldn't Stewart's quote equally apply to "persecuted" atheists? In other words would you accept "not getting everything you want"?

Days 298 wrote: »

And correction it is the Catholic Hierarchy and its minions consisting of OAPs are motivated by self interest. Wanting non denominational healthcare and schooling choice for other citizens is hardly self interest. Its actually quite considerate and progressive.

That doesn't make any sense. How is what you've just said any kind of "correction" to Gilmore being exposed by Wikileaks of lying to the Irish public?

Days 298 wrote: »

I've heard that before.... generally from an OAP giving out about any change of any kind in the country.

No.
You would have heard it from the Central Statistics Office.

Days 298 wrote: »

No matter how much religion and its fundamentalists kick and screams the average Irish citizen, religious or atheist, is in favour of and never objecting to change to progress society and make it more inclusive. One of the biggest problems is how far behind and slow moving our politicians are.

And where do these "headcases" who you clearly hold in contempt fit into your inclusive utopia?

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You would have heard it from the Central Statistics Office.

Which page of Census 2011: Profile 7 - Religion, Ethnicity and Irish Travellers are you referring to?

The thing that I find interesting about the CSO's data, is that they count Roman Catholicism as one religion, and then combine all of the other Christian denominations with other religions. Seems to me like it would make more sense to group the Christian denominations together, and have the other religions separate.

Anyway, the CSO stat from 2011 is 84% Catholic - which is the lowest number on record since the 1961 rate of 94%. I also know that many of those who would indicate 'Catholic' on the census form, aren't practicing Catholics, or else understand their 'Catholicism' in cultural terms more than religious terms. Also, if we have to deduct the 110,410 of those who are Polish nationals, then the number is down to 81.7%. Actually, I mean it's down to 75.9% if you deduct all of those other-national Catholics and look only at the number or Irish Catholics counted.

The other very interesting thing to watch over the next few census years, will be how the rate changes for the younger age groups - how many of the under-40s and under-30s. That's going to be a very interesting development.

Brown Bomber

AerynSun wrote: »

Also, if we have to deduct the 110,410 of those who are Polish nationals, then the number is down to 81.7%. Actually, I mean it's down to 75.9% if you deduct all of those other-national Catholics and look only at the number or Irish Catholics counted.

.

What are you talking about? Are Polish Catholics lesser citizens???

I said Ireland was OFFICALLY 90% CHRISTIAN.

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What are you talking about? Are Polish Catholics lesser citizens???

I said Ireland was OFFICALLY 90% CHRISTIAN.

From some of the things I see and hear (here and out on the street), I don't know that I have an answer for you: do we count the Polish when they add to the number of Catholics, but we don't count them when we're selling our cars?

Anyway - so that 90% Christian figure: comes from adding the 84% Catholic to which 'other Christian' figures? Can you give me a quick tally of the Christian figures that you're talking about? (They're all there, in Profile 7)

AerynSun

So by my count, from Census 2011 - we're talking about these numbers? Are all of these 'Christian' by accepted/agreed definition?

TOTAL POPULATION: 4,588,252

Roman Catholic: 3,861,335 (of all nationalities, not just Irish)
Church of Ireland [including Protestant] (which makes me wonder how the Census officials understood 'Protestant'): 129,039
Orthodox: 45,223
Presbyterian: 24,600
Apostolic or Pentecostal: 14,043
Methodist: 6,842
Jehovah's Witness (Christian if you ask them): 6,149
Lutheran: 5,683
Evangelical: 4,188
Baptist: 3,531
Latter Day Saints [Mormon] (also Christian by their own definition): 1,284
Quaker: 925
Brethren: 336 (I have no idea whether I should be counting them? Are these like the Masons?)

Lapsed Roman Catholic: 1,279 (sure now why do they have their own category on the census? Do we count them as Christians or do we count them as people with no religion?)

Brown Bomber

AerynSun wrote: »

So by my count, from Census 2011 - we're talking about these numbers? Are all of these 'Christian' by accepted/agreed definition?

TOTAL POPULATION: 4,588,252

Roman Catholic: 3,861,335 (of all nationalities, not just Irish)
Church of Ireland [including Protestant] (which makes me wonder how the Census officials understood 'Protestant'): 129,039
Orthodox: 45,223
Presbyterian: 24,600
Apostolic or Pentecostal: 14,043
Methodist: 6,842
Jehovah's Witness (Christian if you ask them): 6,149
Lutheran: 5,683
Evangelical: 4,188
Baptist: 3,531
Latter Day Saints [Mormon] (also Christian by their own definition): 1,284
Quaker: 925
Brethren: 336 (I have no idea whether I should be counting them? Are these like the Masons?)

Lapsed Roman Catholic: 1,279 (sure now why do they have their own category on the census? Do we count them as Christians or do we count them as people with no religion?)

Again, not sure what your point is. Never heard of Brethren before, but they are Christian as are all the others listed except for "lapsed Catholic" which we can disregard which still leaves us with 90% Christian.

http://christianity.about.com/od/Church-Of-The-Brethren/a/The-Brethren-Beliefs.htm

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Again, not sure what your point is. Never heard of Brethren before, but they are Christian as are all the others listed except for "lapsed Catholic" which we can disregard which still leaves us with 90% Christian.

http://christianity.about.com/od/Church-Of-The-Brethren/a/The-Brethren-Beliefs.htm

Well, if we add up all of those figures I listed, Ireland is officially 89.4% Christian. And given that there's a broad range of theology and ideology covered in the denominations listed, when we start talking about legislation and public administration needing to take Christian values into account - it opens up a range of questions about how different Christians understand and feel about different issues. We can say "nearly 90% of the population would agree with a Christian approach to the way we run our schools", but in practice, what does that actually mean in terms of the specifics? Do ALL Christians hold the same views and opinions about every aspect of the education system? And if they don't... how do we go about reconciling an argument based on doing something because it's the "Christian preference"?

If anything, this highlights the need for more dialogue and constructive debate about the many issues - rather than holding our ground and saying "we're an 89.4% majority, so what we want, goes"?

Days 298

What difference does it make if 90% of the country tick the Christian box on the census? What is the point being made? We all know that no where near 90% of Christians here follow Christian/Catholic doctrine. Just watch the Gay Marriage Referendum and the public opinion polls during the abortion debate. We arent a Christian society. Not even a Catholic society which is the predominant domination.
How does the 90% figure affect anything? As the man in the OP link complained the church is not in charge of social engineering, he believed labour is when in truth the people are

hfallada

I have spent the last month researching interculturalism for a college paper. This most obvious example is Quebec in Canada, which fears it will lose its culture and identity with foreign migrants. Interculturalism means the Quebeckers doesnt have to comprise on their heritage such as their language and particularly their strong catholic faith. All Quebecs leaders have catholic funerals and christmas decorations are found all over state buildings.

But most importantly Quebeckers acknowledge they must be inclusive of people who are "different" aka the migrants. Irish schools are not in any way inclusive of "different". At the moment its a catholic church run school or tough. The irish education system hasnt changed to be inclusive. Quebec has learned being inclusive dont have to comprise their heritage but can strengthen national identify which is more important. This isnt my opinion, but what several academic papers have stated.

Brown Bomber

AerynSun wrote: »

Well, if we add up all of those figures I listed, Ireland is officially 89.4% Christian. And given that there's a broad range of theology and ideology covered in the denominations listed, when we start talking about legislation and public administration needing to take Christian values into account - it opens up a range of questions about how different Christians understand and feel about different issues. We can say "nearly 90% of the population would agree with a Christian approach to the way we run our schools", but in practice, what does that actually mean in terms of the specifics? Do ALL Christians hold the same views and opinions about every aspect of the education system? And if they don't... how do we go about reconciling an argument based on doing something because it's the "Christian preference"?

If anything, this highlights the need for more dialogue and constructive debate about the many issues - rather than holding our ground and saying "we're an 89.4% majority, so what we want, goes"?

Okay, let's take an example...

Officially 9 out of 10 Irish citizens at a minimum should have no objection to a crucifix hanging in a public classroom. Do you object to this? Is this something you could compromise on and accept as the will of the majority?

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Okay, let's take an example...

Officially 9 out of 10 Irish citizens at a minimum should have no objection to a crucifix hanging in a public classroom. Do you object to this? Is this something you could compromise on and accept as the will of the majority?

Ooooo... if you had said 8 out of 10, I would have said that was a reasonable but debatable assertion - because crucifixes are a Catholic symbol.

If you're telling me 9 out of 10, then I'm going to dispute that, because all of those other Christian denominations that make up the 89.4% wouldn't themselves be fans of having a crucifix. They'd be okay with a cross - but not with the Christ figure attached to it. I know this from years of working in a multi-denominational environment.

And even so - of the 8 out of 10 who are Catholic, I still think it's debatable whether all of them would feel it was necessary to have a crucifix in a classroom before any constructive teaching/learning can take place. It wouldn't get in the way, but not having one shouldn't be an issue.

Days 298

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Okay, let's take an example...

Officially 9 out of 10 Irish citizens at a minimum should have no objection to a crucifix hanging in a public classroom. Do you object to this? Is this something you could compromise on and accept as the will of the majority?

No. There are alot of secular minded people who identify as Christian on the census. Just because they wouldnt object doesnt mean its right. Again the example being Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia.

Should we just accept that Pro-Life and a ban on gay marriage are the will of the majority too as the census says it should be.

Or is it the case of while in Rome and the 1 in 10 should just accept that they are a threat to Irish (Catholic) culture and identity and shut up or leave.

Brown Bomber

AerynSun wrote: »

Ooooo... if you had said 8 out of 10, I would have said that was a reasonable but debatable assertion - because crucifixes are a Catholic symbol.

If you're telling me 9 out of 10, then I'm going to dispute that, because all of those other Christian denominations that make up the 89.4% wouldn't themselves be fans of having a crucifix. They'd be okay with a cross - but not with the Christ figure attached to it. I know this from years of working in a multi-denominational environment.

And even so - of the 8 out of 10 who are Catholic, I still think it's debatable whether all of them would feel it was necessary to have a crucifix in a classroom before any constructive teaching/learning can take place. It wouldn't get in the way, but not having one shouldn't be an issue.

I feel you are being a little bit pedantic. I'm not long back from Greece and I know the Orthodox Churches use Crucifixes and I've definitely seen them in every Lutheran Church that I've been to where I live in Sweden.

The point is are you as a secularist (I assume) prepared to compromise and live in a partially religious society? All I am seeing is a clash between two ends of the extreme. I'm starting to think it is less about religion and more about politics. Conservatives/patriots/nationalists vs progressive, feminist marxist types.

Skrynesaver

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Okay, let's take an example...

Officially 9 out of 10 Irish citizens at a minimum should have no objection to a crucifix hanging in a public classroom. Do you object to this? Is this something you could compromise on and accept as the will of the majority?

Yes, I have a problem with a crucifix in a classroom, more than 90% of people have no objection to an absence of cucifix in a room, so why would we put an exclusive symbol in a publicly funded space?

Ash.J.Williams

Liberal agenda - a group of people who can't be arsed going to mass and make up their own minds about things using facts.

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The point is are you as a secularist (I assume) prepared to compromise and live in a partially religious society? All I am seeing is a clash between two ends of the extreme. I'm starting to think it is less about religion and more about politics. Conservatives/patriots/nationalists vs progressive, feminist marxist types.

Until quite recently I was a deeply religious progressive feminist. Ironically, it was the conservatively religious end of the spectrum that wasn't prepared to let me be freely and fully myself and kept insisting that I let go of my progressive feminist socialism if I wanted to call myself genuinely religious. I can't tell you how offensive I found that, it was an extremely political demand from a quarter that I had (until then!) considered to be my home ground. As a result... I upped and offed and 'went over' to the secular side. Because the secular side was less political than the religious environment in which I found myself.

So yes, you can push me to 'agree' that I'd be okay with a crucifix in a classroom (because honestly, I would be FINE with it - apart from that it can be a symbol of oppression for the minorities in the room!)... but... why can't you come over to this side and say that you'd be absolutely okay with getting an education in a crucifix-free zone? Why do you NEED there to be a crucifix in the room before you believe that your God is present in all the ways that matter (love, compassion, tenderness)?

Brown Bomber

Days 298 wrote: »

No..

So again, what are you prepared to compromise on? Or is it a zero-sum game for you?

And could you please reread your John Stewart quote and say if it applies to you?

Skrynesaver

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So again, what are you prepared to compromise on? Or is it a zero-sum game for you?

And could you please reread your John Stewart quote and say if it applies to you?

Are you trolling or do you genuinely not see the difference between an absence of religious influence in the public sphere and its presence?

If you share a meal with a Christian friend and they insist on bacon in the meal, are you failing to accomodate them if you ask for something you can both eat?

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I feel you are being a little bit pedantic. I'm not long back from Greece and I know the Orthodox Churches use Crucifixes and I've definitely seen them in every Lutheran Church that I've been to where I live in Sweden.

The point is are you as a secularist (I assume) prepared to compromise and live in a partially religious society? All I am seeing is a clash between two ends of the extreme. I'm starting to think it is less about religion and more about politics. Conservatives/patriots/nationalists vs progressive, feminist marxist types.

Jaysus no, not the feminists....I'm scared now.

Brown Bomber

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Are you trolling or do you genuinely not see the difference between an absence of religious influence in the public sphere and its presence?

If you share a meal with a Christian friend and they insist on bacon in the meal, are you failing to accomodate them if you ask for something you can both eat?

That is an opportunity to build bridges through, dialogue, tolerance, and mutual respect is it not?

Skrynesaver

Because if your Christian friend respects you they will not shove the unaceptable down your throat?

Bannasidhe

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Can't believe that you would try and deny the centuries old roots of Christianity in Ireland and it's significant role in what was to become our nations evolution

Believe that I would not only try, I would disprove that Christianity had the roots or the significant role in Gaelic Ireland that you claim for it.

It's 'significant' role was a present from our island neighbours on the island to our right (ironic eh!) and used then as justification for violent conquest (twice) - the Irish just weren't Christian enough said Rome (constantly) and Canterbury (several times). The inability of the Irish to be 'proper' Christians was one of the few things all sides agreed on during the Reformation. Go Us!

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

Jaysus no, not the feminists....I'm scared now.

BOO.



:pac:

Nodin

they've found me....sweet mother of Christ.....

Brown Bomber

AerynSun wrote: »

Until quite recently I was a deeply religious progressive feminist. Ironically, it was the conservatively religious end of the spectrum that wasn't prepared to let me be freely and fully myself and kept insisting that I let go of my progressive feminist socialism if I wanted to call myself genuinely religious. I can't tell you how offensive I found that, it was an extremely political demand from a quarter that I had (until then!) considered to be my home ground. As a result... I upped and offed and 'went over' to the secular side. Because the secular side was less political than the religious environment in which I found myself.

So yes, you can push me to 'agree' that I'd be okay with a crucifix in a classroom (because honestly, I would be FINE with it - apart from that it can be a symbol of oppression for the minorities in the room!)... but... why can't you come over to this side and say that you'd be absolutely okay with getting an education in a crucifix-free zone? Why do you NEED there to be a crucifix in the room before you believe that your God is present in all the ways that matter (love, compassion, tenderness)?

Of course I'd be fine with or without. I live in a secular state. My wife is agnostic but has Rosary Beads from South America hanging up, Buddhas all over the place and I have an ornate Quran that I was given as a gift, I even have the Pharonic key to life symbol. I treat them all with respect, not because of any supernatural powers they may have but out of respect of what they symbolise to others. I really don't understand why others can't extend this same level of respect to others.

AerynSun

Nodin wrote: »

they've found me....sweet mother of Christ.....

We used Brian Shanahan's microscope from the other thread... :P

Sarky

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Believe that I would not only try, I would disprove that Christianity had the roots or the significant role in Gaelic Ireland that you claim for it.

It's 'significant' role was a present from our island neighbours on the island to our right (ironic eh!) and used then as justification for violent conquest (twice) - the Irish just weren't Christian enough said Rome (constantly) and Canterbury (several times). The inability of the Irish to be 'proper' Christians was one of the few things all sides agreed on during the Reformation. Go Us!

Heh, I am just after an outraged uberCatholic telling me on Twitter that if not for the RCC we'd all be Unionists. I immediately thought of you. ^_^

Days 298

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So again, what are you prepared to compromise on? Or is it a zero-sum game for you?

And could you please reread your John Stewart quote and say if it applies to you?

I said no to the 9 out of 10 would have no problem with the cross.

I believe in separation of state and church. Where everyone feels included. I went to a Catholic secondary school and I felt excluded due to my lack of faith in some classes and addresses by the principal.

My compromise is no child or adult should feel excluded from a state address like the Christmas address or a state funded building like a school or hospital

I've no problem with individuals expressing their faith in public. Decorate you hospital bed with your faiths objects. My problem is if I go to use a hospital I find crosses placed everywhere by the state funded hospital. Private hospitals can do as they please IMO as well as schools.

Here's the compromise. Freedom of expression and practice of religion for all but the state should not endow a faith.

It's easy. We all live side by side. All feeling included in our multicultural society and no one left out due to their faith or lack of. What's wrong with that?

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I really don't understand why others can't extend this same level of respect to others.

In my experience, it's because a lot of the 'dialogue' is done in a very competitive spirit. If I feel like someone is trying to get me to submit to their superiority, then I will fight with all my might against whatever it is that they're proposing. But if I feel that the person is genuinely interested in understanding, and is willing to respect difference... then it's a different conversation.

Sally Kohn makes a good point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCJTV5KaJJc

Bannasidhe

Sarky wrote: »

Heh, I am just after an outraged uberCatholic telling me on Twitter that if not for the RCC we'd all be Unionists. I immediately thought of you. ^_^

Can't take the credit for unearthing the truth behind the so-called Island of Saints and Scholars BS - that was done and dusted back in the 1970s.

Can't imagine why it never made the School History textbooks... :rolleyes:

I am busy proving that there were *gasp* Gaelic women and they drank, shagged, owned lots of stuff in their own right, had private armies and navies, controlled nearly all the money in the country and divorced or aborted pregnancies when they wished to...

:cool:

It's all right there in the State Papers and Gaelic Annals.

robindch

AerynSun wrote: »

Well, if we add up all of those figures I listed, Ireland is officially 89.4% Christian.

That figure is unlikely to reflect reality in any meaningful sense for a range of reasons including:

• Parents filling out census forms for kids and putting down their own religious beliefs, not any religious beliefs actually held by the child (if any).
• People claiming a religious belief to help maintain domestic tranquility
• People claiming a religious belief for reasons of culture or tradition, rather than supernatural reasons
• People claiming a religious belief, when their beliefs about the religion are mildly or substantially incorrect

When you add up the above, I think the figure of ~90% christian is likely to decline drastically -- IMHO, probably to less than 50%, and quite possibly closer to 10% or less especially on account of the last reason.

The current inflated figures for christian belief are like so much else in christian belief - nothing more than a pious, self-interested fiction.

AerynSun

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am busy proving that there were *gasp* Gaelic women and they drank, shagged, owned lots of stuff in their own right, had private armies and navies, controlled nearly all the money in the country and divorced or aborted pregnancies when they wished to...

:cool:

It's all right there in the State Papers and Gaelic Annals.

Is Brigid of Kildare in there?

AerynSun

robindch wrote: »

That figure is unlikely to reflect reality in any meaningful sense for a range of reasons

I'm totally with you on everything that you've said - but until someone has done some scientifically credible social research on the subject, there isn't going to be any reliable data that can be used as the basis for a universally acceptable argument on the subject. I don't know anyone who has money to invest in this research, so it's unlikely to happen anytime soon (unless someone can write a convincing research proposal and 'sell' it to some rich blighter who has a ton of money they'd be willing to give to this worthy cause?).

So, in the absence of said incontrovertible research, for argument's sake, I'm willing to work with the stat of 89.4% Christian population in Ireland.

89.4% doesn't mean that there's a universally agreeable approach to everything Christian, either

robindch

AerynSun wrote: »

I'm totally with you on everything that you've said - but until someone has done some scientifically credible social research on the subject, there isn't going to be any reliable data that can be used as the basis for a universally acceptable argument on the subject.

There's a lot of surveys about from which it's possible to gain a fairly accurate picture of the precariousness of catholic belief.

Two minutes with google shows this mostly-pointless mostly-political poll from the ACP which showed that 75% of people who claim to be catholic disagree with the church's dogma on gay men having sex. Faith Survey quotes an IT poll which shows that only 26% of people who claim to be catholic believe in transubstantiation, one of the most important dogmas of the RCC. Irish Central quotes another IT poll which shows that 45 per cent do not believe in hell, 18 per cent do not believe that God created man and a truly confused 7% don't believe in whatever god they happen to believe other catholics believe. A Gallup Poll claims that in 2011, 44% of the country are "not religious".

Given these figures, claiming that 90% of the country are catholic/christian/whatever is -- as above -- flat out wrong.

Bannasidhe

AerynSun wrote: »

Is Brigid of Kildare in there?

I only go back to the 11 century an up to the early 17th. I do have the redoubtable Fionnuala Nic Dhomhnaill aka Iníon Dubh who, allegedly, swum out to a Crannóg and slit the throats of 9 men who 'insulted' her - as she had a personal army of some 1500 men it was agreed to not press the matter...

and of course I have Gráinne Ní Mháille - could paper the downstairs loo with documents in the State Papers about her activities... My favourite being a letter from a tax collector to Elizabeth's 'PM' Burghley in London where he explains why he was unable collect any money - Gráinne, apparently, wrote him a letter and told him both herself an her husband were on their way to intercept him but that she was half a day closer and how he should hope her husband reached him first or... He fled.

AerynSun

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I only go back to the 11 century an up to the early 17th. I do have the redoubtable Fionnuala Nic Dhomhnaill aka Iníon Dubh who, allegedly, swum out to a Crannóg and slit the throats of 9 men who 'insulted' her - as she had a personal army of some 1500 men it was agreed to not press the matter...

and of course I have Gráinne Ní Mháille - could paper the downstairs loo with documents in the State Papers about her activities... My favourite being a letter from a tax collector to Elizabeth's 'PM' Burghley in London where he explains why he was unable collect any money - Gráinne, apparently, wrote him a letter and told him both herself an her husband were on their way to intercept him but that she was half a day closer and how he should hope her husband reached him first or... He fled.

Sure sounds like you have an interesting job alright
I could take inspiration from Fionnuala - there be a few men who've 'insulted' me, and... mmm... right let me stop before my retribution fantasies sweep me into trouble

I asked about Brigid because there's an interesting tidbit on Choice Ireland's website from 2008, where they call her Ireland's First Abortionist.

Bannasidhe

AerynSun wrote: »

I asked about Brigid because there's an interesting tidbit on Choice Ireland's website from 2008, where they call her Ireland's First Abortionist.

Yup.

It's in Life of St Bridget.

Available here: http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/T201010/

AerynSun

robindch wrote: »

There's a lot of surveys about from which it's possible to gain a fairly accurate picture of the precariousness of catholic belief.

Two minutes with google shows this mostly-pointless mostly-political poll from the ACP which showed that 75% of people who claim to be catholic disagree with the church's dogma on gay men having sex. Faith Survey quotes an IT poll which shows that only 26% of people who claim to be catholic believe in transubstantiation, one of the most important dogmas of the RCC. Irish Central quotes another IT poll which shows that 45 per cent do not believe in hell, 18 per cent do not believe that God created man and a truly confused 7% don't believe in whatever god they happen to believe other catholics believe. A Gallup Poll claims that in 2011, 44% of the country are "not religious".

Given these figures, claiming that 90% of the country are catholic/christian/whatever is -- as above -- flat out wrong.

Two minutes with Google isn't necessarily the best way to get reliable, trusted data that carries any kind of credibility in religious circles - but since Faith Survey gives good references to IPSOS MRBI surveys, I'm more impressed than I would have been otherwise. But thanks for all of those links - will be looking into them and seeing what I can use, and add to my archive of useful references. Appreciate the pointers

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Yup.

It's in Life of St Bridget.

Available here: http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/T201010/

Excellent - thanks for the pointer, that's very useful

robindch

AerynSun wrote: »

Two minutes with Google isn't necessarily the best way to get reliable, trusted data that carries any kind of credibility in religious circles [...]

Two minutes is enough to get a good picture and an hour would produce fairly incontrovertible evidence but it would be wasted:

AerynSun

robindch wrote: »

Two minutes is enough to get a good picture and an hour would produce fairly incontrovertible evidence but it would be wasted:

Okay okay, I take your point, I will stop whining about the lack of research and do a literature review... when I get time (in amongst all of my other projects).

But you're right though, that in many cases people only hear what they already believe. The old 'confirmation bias'. (Awful pun... sorry!) :pac:

This is a great article.

Brown Bomber

Days 298 wrote: »

I said no to the 9 out of 10 would have no problem with the cross.

I believe in separation of state and church. Where everyone feels included. I went to a Catholic secondary school and I felt excluded due to my lack of faith in some classes and addresses by the principal.

My compromise is no child or adult should feel excluded from a state address like the Christmas address or a state funded building like a school or hospital

I've no problem with individuals expressing their faith in public. Decorate you hospital bed with your faiths objects. My problem is if I go to use a hospital I find crosses placed everywhere by the state funded hospital. Private hospitals can do as they please IMO as well as schools.

Here's the compromise. Freedom of expression and practice of religion for all but the state should not endow a faith.

It's easy. We all live side by side. All feeling included in our multicultural society and no one left out due to their faith or lack of. What's wrong with that?

I more or less agree with you but let's be honest your "compromise" is non-existent. You aren't prepared to offer the sizable majority of Christians anything at all beyond no anti-clericalism. You just insist you are right and they are wrong

Brown Bomber

robindch wrote: »

There's a lot of surveys about from which it's possible to gain a fairly accurate picture of the precariousness of catholic belief.

Two minutes with google shows this mostly-pointless mostly-political poll from the ACP which showed that 75% of people who claim to be catholic disagree with the church's dogma on gay men having sex. Faith Survey quotes an IT poll which shows that only 26% of people who claim to be catholic believe in transubstantiation, one of the most important dogmas of the RCC. Irish Central quotes another IT poll which shows that 45 per cent do not believe in hell, 18 per cent do not believe that God created man and a truly confused 7% don't believe in whatever god they happen to believe other catholics believe. A Gallup Poll claims that in 2011, 44% of the country are "not religious".

Given these figures, claiming that 90% of the country are catholic/christian/whatever is -- as above -- flat out wrong.

You can't honestly put some random anonymous surveys with pockets of the population over the national census which surveys the entire population?

Can you see historians of the future referring to Gallup Polls data when the census figures are available?

AerynSun

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You can't honestly put some random anonymous surveys with pockets of the population over the national census which surveys the entire population?

Can you see historians of the future referring to Gallup Polls data when the census figures are available?

The census gathers quantitative data only - so it cannot be used as a stand-alone measure of people's faith experience. Qualitative data is needed, and if the closest thing that we have are representative polls done by reputable agencies like IPSOS MRBI... then those polls should be taken to give complementary insight into a complex faith landscape.

It's not an either/or situation, it's a both/and.

Brown Bomber

AerynSun wrote: »

The census gathers quantitative data only - so it cannot be used as a stand-alone measure of people's faith experience. Qualitative data is needed, and if the closest thing that we have are representative polls done by reputable agencies like IPSOS MRBI... then those polls should be taken to give complementary insight into a complex faith landscape.

It's not an either/or situation, it's a both/and.

Granted, but If we are not to use the census figures for gauging religious affiliation which is specific down to the last persona then what do we use?

No amount of private surveys on a limited number of people can contradict the census. It eliminates speculation.

robindch

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You can't honestly put some random anonymous surveys with pockets of the population over the national census which surveys the entire population?

I'm not sure if you read my post before replying to it -- I'm saying that the census figures are unreliable because they do not say what people think they say. For the reasons given. In this case, historians of the future are unfortunately quite likely to laugh when reading the figures and wonder why people so cheerfully spent so long deluding themselves.

robindch

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No amount of private surveys on a limited number of people can contradict the census.

I'm afraid they most certainly can.

For -- again -- the reasons given.

Bannasidhe

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Can you see historians of the future referring to Gallup Polls data when the census figures are available?

If they are any good at their job they will certainly examine all available information and investigate why there is such a discrepancy between census and polls.

wp_rathead

Brown Bomber

robindch wrote: »

That figure is unlikely to reflect reality in any meaningful sense for a range of reasons including:

• Parents filling out census forms for kids and putting down their own religious beliefs, not any religious beliefs actually held by the child (if any).
• People claiming a religious belief to help maintain domestic tranquility
• People claiming a religious belief for reasons of culture or tradition, rather than supernatural reasons
• People claiming a religious belief, when their beliefs about the religion are mildly or substantially incorrect

When you add up the above, I think the figure of ~90% christian is likely to decline drastically -- IMHO, probably to less than 50%, and quite possibly closer to 10% or less especially on account of the last reason.

The current inflated figures for christian belief are like so much else in christian belief - nothing more than a pious, self-interested fiction.

The above looks like idle speculation to me. Could you be precise in the numbers effected for each point and support with evidence your claims?