Increase in people identifying as having No Religion

beauf wrote: »

The term Catholic country is a bit of a meaningless description. Probably means different things to different people.

It was a short post but you still manage to make your response about the irrelevant part.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

...claiming Ireland to be a catholic country, ....

The term Catholic country is a bit of a meaningless description. Probably means different things to different people.

... and checking mass attendance....

looksee

The actual solution would be for there to be a referendum, since the whole business is centered on the constitution. However this would open the gates to the wild imaginings that we have seen on this forum of claims that 'schools will be forced to teach atheism' and similar nonsense.

beauf wrote: »

I don't think I did. And what you believe wasn't my question. My question was really that the number in a religion shouldn't decide whats taught in school. darjeeling made that point better than I did.

Nobody has disagreed with that. But that doesn't change the use of census data in bolstering arguments claiming Ireland to be a catholic country, which is then used to argue the usual.

Deleted User wrote: »

You keep asking this. Of everyone. Regardless of their post, as far as I can see.

I never thought religion should be in schools.

I don't think I did. And what you believe wasn't my question. My question was really that the number in a religion shouldn't decide whats taught in school. darjeeling made that point better than I did.

Trying to expand the scope of such things hasnt worked in the past. Specific issues would have a better chance of success.

beauf wrote: »

If 90% of people ticked all the boxes for RC do you still think religion should be in schools.

You keep asking this. Of everyone. Regardless of their post, as far as I can see.

I never thought religion should be in schools.

beauf wrote: »

I would agree. Though I dunno if the census or a referendum is the correct platform for that.

I'd say census if we're talking about preferring a secular approach to running society in general, as opposed to a specific issue which might be better suited to a referendum.

darjeeling

Thirty years ago the census and mass attendance showed that country was still overwhelmingly Catholic, yet people were ready to see contraception legalised.
Ditto 20 years ago when people voted narrowly by referendum to allow divorce (I bet there wouldn't be much opposition today).
And only two years ago 62% voted to allow sex marriage even though 84% had ticked Roman Catholic in the census just four years earlier.

So the high number of people historically ticking 'Roman Catholic' has not been a good guide to popular thinking on social issues.

Now the census shows an accelerating trend towards ticking 'no religion' amongst younger adults. Almost one in five people in their mid-20s did this last year.

That means that there is even less reason to assume that a majority would agree with the traditional establishment / doctrinal Catholic line on education, healthcare & family planning, end of life decisions etc. Instead, policy makers need to find out what people are actually thinking on these issues.

I think that's the value of the census religion question.

smacl wrote: »

...I think the issue with the census is that it needs to add a question that relates to secular preference as distinct from religious affiliation. ...

I would agree. Though I dunno if the census or a referendum is the correct platform for that.

The majority of this thread seems to be focused on something entirely different.

beauf wrote: »

Not in relation to schools. Which is really what 99% of this debate is about.
There is value in data. Once you understand what the data is, and what it isn't. Religion should be separated from the state and thus schools. That just logical. The argument for that doesn't need census data.

The issue is if any politician or govt try to implement this. How will this effect their popularity, their votes. If you think the census isn't an accurate reflection of the majority opinion then there should be no problem. If it does then that is a problem for whomever tries to implement it.

Again its isn't that people identify as being RC. Its if they want patronage to continue. That's an entirely different question. You don't know if people want patronage to continue from that census. Though people are trying to infer that meaning from it. That's flawed logic and not understanding the data.

For example just because some ticked RC on the census, doesn't not mean they want time that could be used for something else to be used for religion. I don't think you would infer that for Irish as a Subject. So why do it for religion.

While I'd agree with you to that church and state should be entirely separate including with respect to education, I think this is a matter of preference as well as logic to some extent. As such it is a piece of statistical information that is at least as worthy of capture as nominal religious affiliation. Only by understanding the secular preferences of the people can the politicians properly implement those preferences. I think the census as it stands doesn't provide much useful information and the politicians play it safe by supporting the status quo.

I think the issue with the census is that it needs to add a question that relates to secular preference as distinct from religious affiliation. While I imagine that most Irish Catholics would like to see civil and religious matters kept separate, as can be seen from the same sex marriage issue, we don't know whether or not that is the case until we measure it.

Deleted User wrote: »

Debate isn't limited to schools.

It's about framing a question in such a way as to get a certain response and leaving the clearly incorrect answer as a good enough record on a census document that is widely used as a reference in public debate and decision making.

Anyone who doesn't have a problem with this is open to accusations of a prior agenda.

If 90% of people ticked all the boxes for RC do you still think religion should be in schools.

Debate isn't limited to schools.

It's about framing a question in such a way as to get a certain response and leaving the clearly incorrect answer as a good enough record on a census document that is widely used as a reference in public debate and decision making.

Anyone who doesn't have a problem with this is open to accusations of a prior agenda.

smacl wrote: »

So your saying that there is no value in knowing what percentage of the population is any given religion and the information should not play any role in decision making. So why do you think we spend time and money collecting this valueless information?

Not in relation to schools. Which is really what 99% of this debate is about.
There is value in data. Once you understand what the data is, and what it isn't. Religion should be separated from the state and thus schools. That just logical. The argument for that doesn't need census data.

The issue is if any politician or govt try to implement this. How will this effect their popularity, their votes. If you think the census isn't an accurate reflection of the majority opinion then there should be no problem. If it does then that is a problem for whomever tries to implement it.

Again its isn't that people identify as being RC. Its if they want patronage to continue. That's an entirely different question. You don't know if people want patronage to continue from that census. Though people are trying to infer that meaning from it. That's flawed logic and not understanding the data.

For example just because some ticked RC on the census, doesn't not mean they want time that could be used for something else to be used for religion. I don't think you would infer that for Irish as a Subject. So why do it for religion.

Mellor wrote: »

Well the church control on the school system isn't based on the census data. It's not like the leasehold is based on maintaining a two-thirds majority.
Also, they link is arguing that we need more non-domination schools, literally the opposite of what your suggesting.

The link suggests the number of non-denominational schools be brought in line with the census figure, which again implies that this figure is relevant to the way that people would prefer to have their children educated. Yet you've just said yourself, the church control of the school system isn't based on census data.

And, how does qualifying how many times a real catholic goes to mass give us any information about their opinions on how schools should be run. It's completely unrelated tbh.
It really just looks like thinly veiled pop at religion. It baffles me why atheist would care.

Where did I make any mention of how often anyone goes to mass? Like the census figures on religion, it clearly has little to no relevance. What does have relevance is the relative demand for non-denominational school places versus denominational ones, where the demand for non-denominational places is considerably higher.

I'd ask you the same question as beauf. What in your opinion is the value of gathering a percentage breakdown of religious affiliation, and what reasonable use can this statistic be put to?

beauf wrote: »

None.

No.

Which is why you shouldn't seek to associate the census data with the ethos and patronage of State schools.

So your saying that there is no value in knowing what percentage of the population is any given religion and the information should not play any role in decision making. So why do you think we spend time and money collecting this valueless information?

looksee wrote: »

How does that reply answer my question?

Because we should be looking at the 'best practice' elsewhere.

By fixating at the RC numbers you're really stuck in a 1950's mindset.

smacl wrote: »

So what's the value of this statistic and do you think it has a role to play in any decision making at a national level?

None.

No.

Which is why you shouldn't seek to associate the census data with the ethos and patronage of State schools.

Mellor

smacl wrote: »

How people self identify is clearly their own concern. If however someone was to suggest that the Roman Catholic church should be allowed maintain state sponsored patronage of 73% of our schools for example, on the basis of the population being 73% Roman Catholic, as is very commonly the case, I'd say it is a nonsense. The reason being there is nothing to indicate that these self identified Catholics are not also secularists who might prefer a more secular education system. We don't know this because it is not asked on the census. Certainly Christians on this forum would appear to favour secularism, and the relative over subscription of secular schools versus Catholic schools would seem to confirm this as a broader trend, but given the layout of the census we don't know whether this is the case or not. At the same time, given the national debate on the baptism barrier this is certainly information we would like to have, so why not collect it?

Well the church control on the school system isn't based on the census data. It's not like the leasehold is based on maintaining a two-thirds majority.
Also, they link is arguing that we need more non-domination schools, literally the opposite of what your suggesting.

And, how does qualifying how many times a real catholic goes to mass give us any information about their opinions on how schools should be run. It's completely unrelated tbh.
It really just looks like thinly veiled pop at religion. It baffles me why atheist would care.

smacl wrote: »

Maybe the orders involved could even use the proceeds to pay of some of their long outstanding debts to the state? :rolleyes:

Absolutely they could I don't see why not, that's got nothing to do with me really.

smacl wrote: »

How people self identify is clearly their own concern. If however someone was to suggest that the Roman Catholic church should be allowed maintain state sponsored patronage of 73% of our schools for example, on the basis of the population being 73% Roman Catholic, as is very commonly the case, I'd say it is a nonsense. The reason being there is nothing to indicate that these self identified Catholics are not also secularists who might prefer a more secular education system. We don't know this because it is not asked on the census. Certainly Christians on this forum would appear to favour secularism, and the relative over subscription of secular schools versus Catholic schools would seem to confirm this as a broader trend, but given the layout of the census we don't know whether this is the case or not. At the same time, given the national debate on the baptism barrier this is certainly information we would like to have, so why not collect it?

if parents are unhappy with the way the schools are run then why don't they organise and lobby the government to change the way the schools are run?
The anti water movement had no problem mobilising 100,000 protestors, a far more important issue such as the education of our children should bring out far more then that, if, as you seem to think, there is widespread dissatisfaction. I'm amazed really.
If they are unhappy with how the schools are run then the parents council in each school should be dealing with constant objections, no?

infogiver wrote: »

Don't know what you mean by "in trouble".
If the church cant afford to keep buildings of worship open because the maintenance of them is too expensive, then they will just close them and possibly sell them, demolish them sell the land, who knows.
What difference this could make to anyone outside of the church, or how it would even be of any interest to anyone is a mystery to me.

Maybe the orders involved could even use the proceeds to pay of some of their long outstanding debts to the state? :rolleyes:

eviltwin wrote: »

The numbers are just one part of it. Church attendees are another. I was reading in the indo at the weekend how in some parts of Dublin attendance is just 3% and how an attendance of 17% is considered good. The church relies on donations and bums on seats. It can make what it wants from the census figures but if people aren't participating in the church they are in trouble. Weddings, christenings etc aren't enough to sustain it.

Don't know what you mean by "in trouble".
If the church cant afford to keep buildings of worship open because the maintenance of them is too expensive, then they will just close them and possibly sell them, demolish them sell the land, who knows.
What difference this could make to anyone outside of the church, or how it would even be of any interest to anyone is a mystery to me.
its highly unlikely that the church attendance will ever reach 0 in Ireland.
I live in largish rural town with a large cathedral that is busy all day with 2 fairly well attended masses on weekdays, lots of people calling to say a prayer, light a candle, have a nap, have a cry, pass some time with a small grandchild, arrange flowers, clean, use the toilet, speak to the sacristan, visit the Easter garden, the crib at Christmas, look at pictures of communion and confirmation children who they may know or who may be related to them, sit in front of the exposition of the blessed sacrament.
too many churches were built in Dublin by ego centric bishops who were determined to leave a mark and a lot of them will have to go.

beauf wrote: »

However that's really of no interest to anyone. All we're really want to know if someone wants to be classified as RC. The Census serves its purpose in that regard.

So what's the value of this statistic and do you think it has a role to play in any decision making at a national level?

looksee

beauf wrote: »

By using the example of other countries where religion is separated from the state schools. Regardless of the how popular any religion is.

How does that reply answer my question?

looksee wrote: »

We have heard over and over that the majority of the country is Catholic and therefore the school system should represent the preferences of the majority. How can we argue against this unless we show that there are not as many Catholics as is being suggested?

If we want to know whether Irish people want the church to run our schools what better way than to ask the Irish people whether they want the church to run our schools? Too easy to confuse religious belief with secular preference.

Mellor wrote: »

If somebody wants to identify as Roman Catholic. That's fine with me. I could care less how rigidly somebody follow the "rules". That's their business.

How people self identify is clearly their own concern. If however someone was to suggest that the Roman Catholic church should be allowed maintain state sponsored patronage of 73% of our schools for example, on the basis of the population being 73% Roman Catholic, as is very commonly the case, I'd say it is a nonsense. The reason being there is nothing to indicate that these self identified Catholics are not also secularists who might prefer a more secular education system. We don't know this because it is not asked on the census. Certainly Christians on this forum would appear to favour secularism, and the relative over subscription of secular schools versus Catholic schools would seem to confirm this as a broader trend, but given the layout of the census we don't know whether this is the case or not. At the same time, given the national debate on the baptism barrier this is certainly information we would like to have, so why not collect it?

looksee wrote: »

We have heard over and over that the majority of the country is Catholic and therefore the school system should represent the preferences of the majority. How can we argue against this unless we show that there are not as many Catholics as is being suggested?

By using the example of other countries where religion is separated from the state schools. Regardless of the how popular any religion is.