Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Census 2016 Results

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,740 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Ush1 wrote: »
    I think it's quite easy to dispute actually, the child hasn't the foggiest notion of any of that.

    Agreed, children are not being taught what it means to be a catholic they are simply taught how to be one and learn prayers and teachings off by rote without any clue to what they mean.

    The argument being made against showing them all religions is that they would be unable to parse this information adequately yet how do the same people expect them to be able to adequately understand things like transubstantiation and other quite complex teachings that the catholic church throws at them from a very young age


  • Options
    #123
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    If they have raised their child with no religion, then I don't see how you're suggesting it's any different to raising a child with religion?

    Both are equally valid world views and philosophies and both would have an influence on a child.

    They are absolutely both valid world views. I am not claiming otherwise. I personally don't agree with baptising kids when they haven't chosen that, I think it's unfair, but many people do and there is no right or wrong, just what we personally think is best. But that wasn't my point.

    The difference regarding parents choosing between those options on the census is that one is attributing a religious identity to that person and one is saying that at this point in time they do not have one so you cannot select on their behalf. You claimed that they are the same in terms of choosing on behalf of the child and making the decision for them.

    Choosing the Catholic option is choosing their religion on their behalf. Absolutely the parents choice to make. But selecting the no religion option is actively not choosing something for them

    They are two separate things. My opinion on one being the better, more fair thing to do is irrelevant to the point I was making. Choosing "no religion" is purely telling it as it is, they haven't chosen their religion yet, they are without a religion of their own choosing. Choosing a specific religion is choosing their religious identity on their behalf.


  • Options
    #124
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,740 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    If they have raised their child with no religion, then I don't see how you're suggesting it's any different to raising a child with religion?

    Both are equally valid world views and philosophies and both would have an influence on a child.

    Because by raising the child with no religion you are leaving it as it came into the world, by baptising it and raising it in a specific religion you are making what ultimately in my opinion is an incredibly personal choice for your child that also is in my opinion taken far to lightly by the majority of parents today, in fairness to you from your discussions here I do not believe the same accusation could be leveled at you but fundamentally I still disagree with what i see as forcing a specific religion upon a child.

    If you want to raise the child using the morals and ethics that the church teaches its just as easy to do without getting religion involved.


  • Options
    #125
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Because by raising the child with no religion you are leaving it as it came into the world, by baptising it and raising it in a specific religion you are making what ultimately in my opinion is an incredibly personal choice for your child that also is in my opinion taken far to lightly by the majority of parents today, in fairness to you from your discussions here I do not believe the same accusation could be leveled at you but fundamentally I still disagree with what i see as forcing a specific religion upon a child.

    If you want to raise the child using the morals and ethics that the church teaches its just as easy to do without getting religion involved.

    You summed up my point better than my attempt. No religion is anything from not decided yet, raised catholic but dont believe, to I don't believe in anything and never have. Choosing Catholic is making a single choice for them. Choosing a religious identity. So they are not the same.


  • Options
    #126
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    ScrubsfanChris
    Registered Users Posts: 8,599 ✭✭✭ScrubsfanChris


    marcbrophy wrote: »
    Personally, I think of number of No Religon is about 3 of 4 times too low.
    It's easily closer to 40%

    Source: I said, didn't I!
    There should be a category for lapses catholics or something.
    Other than funerals/weddings, my parents haven't been to mass in over 10 years yet still tick catholic on the form.


  • Options
    #128
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,621 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Well, I was baptised Roman Catholic but have not been a part of the church in any way since the 1990s so for the past 15 or so years I've put myself down as No Religion.

    Just because I was baptised does that mean that I must declare myself a Catholic. F that!


  • Options
    #129
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    You can also claim that they are "fans of the beatles" because you play them yellow submarine every night. That doesn't mean they will want to be identified as a Beatles fan just cause you are- the horror :pac:
    If asked their favourite band on a form, you would quite rightly (im assuming but maybe I'm wrong?) say "none" until they can express their desires/passions/beliefs for themselves. But yet when it comes to religion parents pick it for them and see no issue.

    Not disagreeing with your actual point though.


  • Options
    #130
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,464 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    It's a terrible analogy to be honest, although perhaps apt in another argument completely about the meaning of being a citizen.

    Could you choose for your daughters to be Israeli citizens?

    What does it mean to be a Catholic?
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    The only thing that matters is the census I'm afraid. I could put down I'm Roman Catholic without having been baptised.


  • Options
    #131
    blue note
    Registered Users Posts: 4,511 ✭✭✭blue note


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Because by raising the child with no religion you are leaving it as it came into the world, by baptising it and raising it in a specific religion you are making what ultimately in my opinion is an incredibly personal choice for your child that also is in my opinion taken far to lightly by the majority of parents today, in fairness to you from your discussions here I do not believe the same accusation could be leveled at you but fundamentally I still disagree with what i see as forcing a specific religion upon a child.

    If you want to raise the child using the morals and ethics that the church teaches its just as easy to do without getting religion involved.

    I know a lot of people have this view and that's fine, but I don't agree with it. I think if you bring a child up in a religion they can properly experience what it's like. Whereas if you bring them up teaching them about different religions or no religion they just have an outside knowledge of it, but no actual experience of it. As they grow older they can decide that religion is or isn't for them and they can decide to change religion if they wish. But without the experience I don't think many would bother.

    I grew up as a Catholic (I even chose to be an alter boy in primary school) and as I grew older I stopped going to mass. Now I go for the usual - weddings / funerals, Christmas, Easter and anniversary masses and the like. I wouldn't have any strong religious beliefs. But I am grateful that I was given the opportunity to experience a religion properly so that I can make an informed decision not to engage in it now. I think if I had kids I'd try to get involved again so that they could have that same experience and choice.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    blue note wrote: »
    I know a lot of people have this view and that's fine, but I don't agree with it. I think if you bring a child up in a religion they can properly experience what it's like. Whereas if you bring them up teaching them about different religions or no religion they just have an outside knowledge of it, but no actual experience of it. As they grow older they can decide that religion is or isn't for them and they can decide to change religion if they wish. But without the experience I don't think many would bother.

    I grew up as a Catholic (I even chose to be an alter boy in primary school) and as I grew older I stopped going to mass. Now I go for the usual - weddings / funerals, Christmas, Easter and anniversary masses and the like. I wouldn't have any strong religious beliefs. But I am grateful that I was given the opportunity to experience a religion properly so that I can make an informed decision not to engage in it now. I think if I had kids I'd try to get involved again so that they could have that same experience and choice.

    So if the religion of the parents happens to be one where TV isn't allowed, birthday parties aren't allowed, meat isn't allowed etc. it is fair that the kids are raised that way because they got to experience religion after all? What about religions where people are ostracised by family after leaving the religion? The kids should be thankful they got to taste what religion is like?

    I get what you're saying that you enjoyed that culture when you were growing up and it's a small part of your identity now which was nice in hindsight but I really wouldn't agree that all kids should be raised with religion just because you happened to enjoy the certain aspects of catholicism that you experienced.


  • Options
    #133
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,464 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    blue note wrote: »
    I know a lot of people have this view and that's fine, but I don't agree with it. I think if you bring a child up in a religion they can properly experience what it's like. Whereas if you bring them up teaching them about different religions or no religion they just have an outside knowledge of it, but no actual experience of it. As they grow older they can decide that religion is or isn't for them and they can decide to change religion if they wish. But without the experience I don't think many would bother.

    I grew up as a Catholic (I even chose to be an alter boy in primary school) and as I grew older I stopped going to mass. Now I go for the usual - weddings / funerals, Christmas, Easter and anniversary masses and the like. I wouldn't have any strong religious beliefs. But I am grateful that I was given the opportunity to experience a religion properly so that I can make an informed decision not to engage in it now. I think if I had kids I'd try to get involved again so that they could have that same experience and choice.

    You think you have to practice a religion before you can make an informed decision on it?


  • Options
    #134
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #135
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Because by raising the child with no religion you are leaving it as it came into the world, by baptising it and raising it in a specific religion you are making what ultimately in my opinion is an incredibly personal choice for your child that also is in my opinion taken far to lightly by the majority of parents today, in fairness to you from your discussions here I do not believe the same accusation could be leveled at you but fundamentally I still disagree with what i see as forcing a specific religion upon a child.

    If you want to raise the child using the morals and ethics that the church teaches its just as easy to do without getting religion involved.


    I can understand where you're coming from, but I wouldn't see it as forcing a specific religion on a child. I see it as welcoming my child into the Church I belong to, and I see it as instructing him in my faith, and bringing him up in my faith, fostering his spiritual development. You may perceive this to be unfair on my child, but it's actually as much my responsibility as it is my right as the child's parent -

    ARTICLE 42

    1 The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children.


    Personally, I wouldn't pass judgement upon you either if you choose to raise your child differently and as you see fit, as is your right and your responsibility. However, this is something that I and my wife agreed on long before we had any children, and I don't see it as any different to raising our child as a boy, in order that one day he will become a man. I'm sure you don't need me to tell you how there are people who for their own reasons believe it is unfair on children to enforce as they see it - gender identities and gender roles, etc. These too are often argued to be social constructs, and if I listened to everyone who had an issue with everyone else's parenting, I'd eventually end up with allowing the child to raise himself without any influence from us as his parents or anyone who in any way might influence our child in their own world views.

    That's how ridiculous and redundant the argument is to me personally anyway for people who would like to tell me that somehow I'm being unfair to my own child because they see one aspect in isolation as problematic or unfair on the child. Their misunderstanding really isn't something I should have to answer for.


  • Options
    #136
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    The Church being made up of not just the Hierarchy, but also the Congregation, I'd say the number of Irish Catholics contributions towards Revenue in their taxes, more than covers not just the funding provided for the education of not just Irish Catholic children, but plenty more besides!


    All I'm saying is if the catholic church wishes to maintain control of such a large number of primary schools then they should fund them, seems reasonable enough to me.

    Ps, I don't personally believe any child has a religion, their parents may do alright, but not a child.

    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    It has nothing to do with Government HG, it's written in the Irish Constitution, and would require a referendum to change it. There's no real demand for change in this regard though as most people are more concerned with getting their children into schools that are consistent with their values and world views. That's why there's not much is going to change with regard to the numbers of children enrolling in schools with a Catholic ethos.

    I'm not being smart but what exactly is in the Constitution, which explicitly states that the state must fund catholic education? I'm not saying it's not in there (nothing would surprise me about the Irish Constitution at this stage), I just don't know exactly where myself.


  • Options
    #137
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.


    The church took away the option to leave the church. People can't opt out anymore.


  • Options
    #138
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,740 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    neonsofa wrote: »
    The church took away the option to leave the church. People can't opt out anymore.

    Yup theres no way to remove your name from their records anymore


  • Options
    #139
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    neonsofa wrote: »
    The church took away the option to leave the church. People can't opt out anymore.

    I wouldn't worry too much that, I don't consider the catholic church a legitimate organisation, in fact I honestly class them as a dangerous cult that has committed awful atrocities in this country. So their claim over me or anybody else who doesn't wish to be associated with them is also completely illegitimate from my point of view. And if you think about even asking them for permission to leave isn't a great idea because it legitimizes their claim.

    Don't even worry about it, just proclaim yourself non-catholic (either privately or publicly, whatever you fancy), and it's done, happy days.


  • Options
    #140
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    I wouldn't worry too much that, I don't consider the catholic church a legitimate organisation, in fact I honestly class them as a dangerous cult that has committed awful atrocities in this country. So their claim over me or anybody else who doesn't wish to be associated with them is also completely illegitimate from my point of view. And if you think about even asking them for permission to leave isn't a great idea because it legitimizes their claim.

    Don't even worry about it, just proclaim yourself non-catholic (either privately or publicly, whatever you fancy), and it's done, happy days.

    Oh I don't worry! All hocus pocus to me, I was just responding to the poster who says that until people officially remove themselves they remain Catholic. People can't opt out officially.


  • Options
    #141
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    neonsofa wrote: »
    Oh I don't worry! All hocus pocus to me, I was just responding to the poster who says that until people officially remove themselves they remain Catholic. People can't opt out officially.

    Ah no I get what you're saying alright.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    __Alex__
    Closed Accounts Posts: 473 ✭✭__Alex__


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Disagree. For anyone who now identifies as athiest, the only choice is 'No religion', at least until such time as they decide to ask who actually practises.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Ah, well here is the crux of the issue. People who no longer consider themselves Catholic don't care what the RC church thinks. They want to think I'm still a member of their club? Let them knock themselves out. I'm not though. :)


  • Options
    #143
    imme
    Registered Users Posts: 3,200 ✭✭✭imme


    Can that number of Brazilians be correct

    They've been coming to Ireland for 'study' for the past 10 years.

    The Indians who are being 'invtited' to study will go the way of the Brazilians​I predict

    An interesting thing with the Indians is that they're bringing their families with them as well


  • Options
    #144
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    imme wrote: »
    Can that number of Brazilians be correct

    They've been coming to Ireland for 'study' for the past 10 years.

    The Indians who are being 'invtited' to study will go the way of the Brazilians​I predict

    An interesting thing with the Indians is that they're bringing their families with them as well

    Relax. Brazilians are only 0.28% of the population and Indians less again. Diversity is a good thing any way.


  • Options
    #145
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Alana Whispering Cheek wrote: »
    Diversity is a good thing any way.

    No, they were a sh*t band.


  • Options
    #146
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,248 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    I can understand where you're coming from, but I wouldn't see it as forcing a specific religion on a child. I see it as welcoming my child into the Church I belong to, and I see it as instructing him in my faith, and bringing him up in my faith, fostering his spiritual development. You may perceive this to be unfair on my child, but it's actually as much my responsibility as it is my right as the child's parent -
    Faith is defined as belief without evidence, so by instructing your child in your belief without evidence, you're not educating them, you're passing on superstitions.

    It is harmful to a persons development to give them a bad education. If I was a teacher who taught children that they shouldn't wash their hands because germs aren't the cause of illness (something lots of alternative medicines teach) then you would be doing harm to your students that takes work to undo. By 'passing on your faith' in something that has no evidence, you are misleading your children and miss-educating them.

    Your children will hopefully overcome this setback, but the cost will be years of confusion and self doubt and needless angst about whether or not they're right for rejecting the superstitions of their parents.

    Personally, I wouldn't pass judgement upon you either if you choose to raise your child differently and as you see fit, as is your right and your responsibility. However, this is something that I and my wife agreed on long before we had any children, and I don't see it as any different to raising our child as a boy, in order that one day he will become a man. I'm sure you don't need me to tell you how there are people who for their own reasons believe it is unfair on children to enforce as they see it - gender identities and gender roles, etc. These too are often argued to be social constructs, and if I listened to everyone who had an issue with everyone else's parenting, I'd eventually end up with allowing the child to raise himself without any influence from us as his parents or anyone who in any way might influence our child in their own world views.

    That's how ridiculous and redundant the argument is to me personally anyway for people who would like to tell me that somehow I'm being unfair to my own child because they see one aspect in isolation as problematic or unfair on the child. Their misunderstanding really isn't something I should have to answer for.[/QUOTE]


  • Options
    #147
    nkav86
    Registered Users Posts: 714 ✭✭✭nkav86


    Late to the conversation, but I was chatting to my mam at that time about the census and the catholic yay/nay question was mentioned.

    She was horrified that I didn't mark myself catholic, 'You can't put that down, you're catholic like me, you were raised that way' I'm thinking, mother not one sinner in our family has ever gone to church willingly (without an occasion or pressure from my granny) on one Sunday, of our ENTIRE lives....including YOU! Get a grip!

    It baffled me she thought that way, it's just so ingrained in people of a certain time, no matter how 'active' in the religion they are or not.


  • Options
    #148
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,621 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    neonsofa wrote: »
    The church took away the option to leave the church. People can't opt out anymore.

    Yes they did, and it's disgusting.:mad:


  • Options
    #149
    __Alex__
    Closed Accounts Posts: 473 ✭✭__Alex__


    nkav86 wrote: »
    It baffled me she thought that way, it's just so ingrained in people of a certain time, no matter how 'active' in the religion they are or not.

    One of my friends is married to Welshman and lives in South Wales, where the Catholic population is tiny and there are no dedicated Catholic schools in her locality. It's much more a Methodist and Church of Wales area and, really, most people don't even care about those religions.

    Her parents cannot wrap their head around the fact that her two children won't be having Communion or any of the other Catholic sacrements. Her first child is baptised as a Catholic but that's as far as they are taking it.

    The main thing my friend's parents can't understand is that the children won't feel like they are missing out. My friend lives in an area where barely anyone has Communion, why would they feel like they were missing out? To her parents, anyone not getting the Catholic sacraments is missing out and will feel a big hole in their lives. They can't envisage another way of life.


  • Options
    #150
    feargale
    Registered Users Posts: 8,636 ✭✭✭feargale


    BabyCheeses wrote: »
    Yeah, I find it strange that my mother would consider us a part of a religion we never really practiced outside of presents at Christmas and chocolate eggs at Easter or saying we were Irish speakers but neither of us could talk to the other in a language other than English.

    When a person says they are a part of a religion I have this mad idea that they might actually follow it. When someone tells me they speak English I also assume that they might speak English instead of looking at me confused when I try to talk to them.

    Why don't you speak to your mother about it? The issue seems to be with her.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    __Alex__
    Closed Accounts Posts: 473 ✭✭__Alex__


    Interesting graph, showing the percentage of 'No Religion' correspondents in the different age groups, compared with the percentage of those age groups in the general population:

    Census_3.jpg


Advertisement