Census 2016 - Time to tick NO

12Phase

One big issue is the fear of the enumerator being the local busybody, looking over the census.

It's a genuine thing in rural areas where as maybe in more anonymous parts of towns and cities nobody really gives a toss.

You should be able to submit the census online much like you can submit most of the CSOs business surveys.

Also there should be one private form per person. Not just a household form filled in by "mammy"

robdonn

12Phase wrote: »

Also there should be one private form per person. Not just a household form filled in by "mammy"

The problem with that is knowing who exactly is in the house at the time and the census forms must be delivered by hand to the person.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

The Randy Riverbeast

robdonn wrote: »

The problem with that is knowing who exactly is in the house at the time and the census forms must be delivered by hand to the person.

Really? Saw a woman with a census high via jacket on the street. Live in an upstairs apartment with no doorbell. I'll never get a form if they have to actually meet me.

Absolam

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Really? Saw a woman with a census high via jacket on the street. Live in an upstairs apartment with no doorbell. I'll never get a form if they have to actually meet me.

We should add that to the list; interfering numerators, misled dads, bossy mammies, scary flatmates, and no doorbells. All conspiring to prevent upstanding atheists demonstrating their credentials in the census. It's a scam, Joe. The Church are behind it, mark my words. They have the doorbell makers in their pockets, so to speak as it were.

NewDirection

Zamboni wrote: »

So 2016, Irish people have another opportunity to identify their religion.

277,237 ticked no religion in the 2011 census
I believe we can make that 500,000
I'm very optimistic.

Please like this page and share if you're on Facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/timetotickno

#timetotickno

Lol, you're doing life wrong.

Take a step back and look at what you are campaigning for. It's pretty irrelevant and unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
You are obviously a highly motivated and pro active person. I think you could do some real great things if you focused on a positive cause instead of a negative one. What a waste.

Cabaal

NewDirection wrote: »

Lol, you're doing life wrong.

Take a step back and look at what you are campaigning for. It's pretty irrelevant and unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
You are obviously a highly motivated and pro active person. I think you could do some real great things if you focused on a positive cause instead of a negative one. What a waste.

How is it a negative one exactly?
We want the government to be provided with accurate data, this data is in turn used to decide such things as how our education system is run.

As we know right now the eduction system discriminates against 5 year olds at the tax payers expense. This is a morally wrong and wasteful use of tax payer money.

Would you rather that the CSO are provided with inaccurate data which means that the state inadequately provides services to its citizens? That seems rather an odd thing to want

wokingvoter

Absolam wrote: »

We should add that to the list; interfering numerators, misled dads, bossy mammies, scary flatmates, and no doorbells. All conspiring to prevent upstanding atheists demonstrating their credentials in the census. It's a scam, Joe. The Church are behind it, mark my words. They have the doorbell makers in their pockets, so to speak as it were.

Well done well done

wokingvoter

Absolam wrote: »

We should add that to the list; interfering numerators, misled dads, bossy mammies, scary flatmates, and no doorbells. All conspiring to prevent upstanding atheists demonstrating their credentials in the census. It's a scam, Joe. The Church are behind it, mark my words. They have the doorbell makers in their pockets, so to speak as it were.

I'd say the Archbishop was on the interviewing panel for the enumerators too.
And David Quinn
Oh it's all fixed from the start!

eviltwin

NewDirection wrote: »

Lol, you're doing life wrong.

Take a step back and look at what you are campaigning for. It's pretty irrelevant and unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
You are obviously a highly motivated and pro active person. I think you could do some real great things if you focused on a positive cause instead of a negative one. What a waste.

Let me guess, you're Catholic right?

spurious

eviltwin wrote: »

Let me guess, you're Catholic right?

Everyone in Ireland is Catholic...silly.

NewDirection

eviltwin wrote: »

Let me guess, you're Catholic right?

Only on the census form.

expectationlost

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

how do you do that?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

recedite

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Really? Saw a woman with a census high via jacket on the street. Live in an upstairs apartment with no doorbell. I'll never get a form if they have to actually meet me.

Like The Terminator, she'll be back.
Sooner or later she'll get past the front door and get access to the common area. Then you'll hear the banging on your apartment door.

LazyClouds

instead of no religion can we all write jedi again?

Hotblack Desiato

LazyClouds wrote: »

instead of no religion can we all write jedi again?

In the UK writing in 'Jedi' is a funny joke. Haha. No harm done.

In Ireland though, as long as we continue to have excessive religious influence on education, health, and legislation, the religion question really should be taken seriously.

nomdeboardie

I haven't yet, and never will, answer this question. I consider my personal thoughts on existance, morality, deities-in-the-skies and my observance or lack of ritual behaviours to be no-one's business unless I choose to tell them. And yes, I'm willing to risk losing limbs for it :pac:

If there must be a religion question, make it voluntary and phrased something like:
"Do you want to identify as being affiliated with a religion or having religious beliefs?"
followed by "If yes, ..."
Add an explanation that the statistics may be use to inform decisions on public policy etc.

That way, those who are concerned with being counted for provision of religion-related services etc. can ensure that they tick the relevant boxes. If historians and sociologists are unhappy with this, tough luck.

nomdeboardie

Meanwhile, here's a blast-from-the-past-census that deals with the mammy(/daddy) factor and more...

kylith

NewDirection wrote: »

Only on the census form.

Why on the census form and nowhere else?

robdonn

nomdeboardie wrote: »

I haven't yet, and never will, answer this question. I consider my personal thoughts on existance, morality, deities-in-the-skies and my observance or lack of ritual behaviours to be no-one's business unless I choose to tell them. And yes, I'm willing to risk losing limbs for it :pac:

If there must be a religion question, make it voluntary and phrased something like:
"Do you want to identify as being affiliated with a religion or having religious beliefs?"
followed by "If yes, ..."
Add an explanation that the statistics may be use to inform decisions on public policy etc.

That way, those who are concerned with being counted for provision of religion-related services etc. can ensure that they tick the relevant boxes. If historians and sociologists are unhappy with this, tough luck.

Why bother fill out the census at all then, if historians and sociologists be damned?

nomdeboardie

robdonn wrote: »

Why bother fill out the census at all then, if historians and sociologists be damned?

Apparently it's compulsory, under pain of prosecution or some-such :eek:...or so they would have me believe :rolleyes:... so I fill out the bits that I find reasonably straightforward and less intrusive

robdonn

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Apparently it's compulsory, under pain of prosecution or some-such :eek:...or so they would have me believe :rolleyes:... so I fill out the bits that I find reasonably straightforward and less intrusive

If you had the option, would you not fill it out at all?

nomdeboardie

robdonn wrote: »

If you had the option, would you not fill it out at all?

If I were convinced the information would be important for public planning, I might offer to would fill out the items I find acceptable and straightforward. If only full cooperation were useful, then I’d decline.

But then, if it were declared voluntary for everyone, I’d know the information would be even less reliable than now, as the subset of people who cooperate are unlikely to be of random characteristics (plus would represent an incomplete head-count). So that would make me even less likely to participate

The Randy Riverbeast

recedite wrote: »

Like The Terminator, she'll be back.
Sooner or later she'll get past the front door and get access to the common area. Then you'll hear the banging on your apartment door.

Good luck to her, she'll have to be the terminator to get in or one of 4 people happens to be coming in or out.

Absolam

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Apparently it's compulsory, under pain of prosecution or some-such :eek:...or so they would have me believe :rolleyes:... so I fill out the bits that I find reasonably straightforward and less intrusive

So... you're complying with the legal obligation to fill in some of the form, but not all of it.... what exactly is the point? Not filling it in at all or not filling it in completely are the same offence, so you're not avoiding any legal compulsion at all just by filling in the bits you like.

wokingvoter

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Apparently it's compulsory, under pain of prosecution or some-such :eek:...or so they would have me believe :rolleyes:... so I fill out the bits that I find reasonably straightforward and less intrusive

Is it just the religion question that bothers you, that you find "intrusive " or do most application forms bother you?
If so, you must find modern life pretty difficult. Applying to have your drivers license renewed will be pretty horrendous for you I would imagine, for example.

WildWater

Apologies if this has already been posted but I've not read all the thread.

"People should answer the question based on how they feel now about their religious beliefs, if any. The question is asking about the person’s current religion or beliefs and not about the religion the person may have been brought up with."
http://census.ie/the-census-and-you/each-question-in-detail/


Last time out I checked RC as I interpreted the question literally (I was not aware of the above clarification). Like many people in Ireland I am technically RC as I was Baptised and Confirmed in that faith and have never revoked it. However, this time out I will definitely be checking option 7 No religion.

Pintman Paddy Losty

It was actually hilarious during the last census. The atheists ran a big campaign about ticking no. Every second poster on boards had a signature encouraging people to tick no. In the end when the census revealed Ireland was an overwhelmingly Catholic country the atheist tried to pretend it was all because mother's filled out the forms for their children. Lol.

robp

I have to call out Humanist Association of Ireland on their dishonest campaign. They argue to tick no religion if you don't practise. Yet not practising a religion is not remotely similar to having no religion. If you believe religion is a private matter why the hell are they telling people how to identify themselves.