Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

Brian Shanahan · 10-01-2014 01:08AM

GarIT wrote: »

Other than the religion problems the agreement has worked fairly OK up until now.

Given the serious problems that existed in religiously run schools up until more recently than I did my Leaving, that is a horrendously false statement.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I fail to see how the National Schools built from the 1830s onwards - some of which are still in use btw - are on 'church' land.

Well going by my parish alone, of the six originally built by the British state for the educational needs of the area, five are still going strong as schools, and on the same land too (well, apart from Nicker NS, they're in the community centre pending a state only funded enlargement of the school buildings. The school has been using two prefabs for forty years to last year. Do you think the "owners" of the school would use a tiny fraction of their vast wealth to actually build the school or expand it when needed? Hell no, the catholic church got to where it is today by never paying for anything).

Bannasidhe · 10-01-2014 01:12AM

Piliger wrote: »

What about the multi denominational schools ? such as Dalkey School Project National School ?

Still have to have a religious component - that is why they are deemed to be 'multi' denominational rather than 'non'. What form this religious component takes and how prevailing it is is decided by the Patron or Management Board.

alaimacerc · 10-01-2014 01:13AM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

But you agree that religious communities have a legal right to maintain the ethos of their schools (the point we were debating)? Yes?

No.

Piliger · 10-01-2014 01:14AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Still have to have a religious component - that is why they are deemed to be 'multi' denominational rather than 'non'. What form this religious component takes and how prevailing it is is decided by the Patron or Management Board.

I don't agree. They must teach religion as a study subject. That does not mean there is any religious component to their school, their ethos.

Piliger · 10-01-2014 01:15AM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

But you agree that religious communities have a legal right to maintain the ethos of their schools (the point we were debating)? Yes?

But what exactly is a "religious community" ?

Brian Shanahan · 10-01-2014 01:16AM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

But you agree that religious communities have a legal right to maintain the ethos of their schools (the point we were debating)? Yes?

Only if they pay for them out of their own pockets.

But that's a big problem for the rcc, as it has never once paid for anything in its whole existence. It would rather squeeze it's believers until their pips squeak and they have to sell their children into slavery than part with a single farthing.

Bannasidhe · 10-01-2014 01:18AM

Piliger wrote: »

I don't agree. They must teach religion as a study subject. That does not mean there is any religious component to their school, their ethos.

The fact remains there are officially no secular schools so it seems unlikely that very many - if any - are lacking a religious component and teaching religion only as a study subject.

alaimacerc · 10-01-2014 01:28AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Submission to the Irish Human Rights Commission, Jan 2011.

'There are no secular schools in Ireland'

http://www.ihrc.ie/download/pdf/reledsub19.pdf pg 2

So, hyperbolic statement (or one based on some esoteric understanding of terminology) by some understandably disgruntled anonymous parent, then, and in no way the position of the IHCR. If it's the position of anyone party to this discussion, can they expand on the point?

Piliger · 10-01-2014 01:33AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The fact remains there are officially no secular schools so it seems unlikely that very many - if any - are lacking a religious component and teaching religion only as a study subject.

I disagree. Teachings religion as a subject of study does not mean they are not secular.

These are secular schools.

alaimacerc · 10-01-2014 02:13AM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I really don't think that's the case. Roman Catholic children attending Roman Catholic schools are being educated to believe in Roman Catholicism....but to suggest that they are being thought that Irish = Roman Catholic is quite insulting.

Sometimes, there's cause for insult to be taken, and sometimes there's more than enough cause for it to be given.

Given the hilariously high rate of "Catholic atheism", not to mention other forms of eye-popping disjunct between census denominational confession, and any vague shred of belief or practice, is that not itself evidence that said schools are succeeding better at indoctrinating Catholicism as an ethnic marker than as any sort of spiritual system?

That RCC schools are somehow havens of racism when, in fact, they are, in many cases the most diverse institutions in many communities.

If true, may speak volumes about "many communities". But by definition, they're not the most diverse institutions in the way that's pertinent to this thread.

Wrong (that's a very common mistake though!). Ireland has approxiamtely 6 (SIX) "State Schools".

Nine "model schools", and around 60 pre-independence state-owned schools, according to Citizen's Information.

Other schools, such as those operated by the RCC are private institutions (which attract public funding) - they are not "State Schools".

Given that in recent years they're predominantly built with very largely state funding, to call them "private institutions" would be misleading at best, and some of us would say "a wildly inaccurate systematic mockery of the truth".

alaimacerc · 10-01-2014 02:17AM

weisses wrote: »

What other "reliable" figure/report are you using to question the census ?

As I've mentioned before, if a survey commissioned by them is good enough for the Conference of Bishops to themselves conclude that over 10% of their fine body of "Catholics" are actually atheists, isn't that a pretty big clue that reported rates of "Catholicism" as a self-identifier are little indication of anything else?

alaimacerc · 10-01-2014 02:30AM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The only survey that can supercede a census is a more recent census.

It's not simply a matter of supersession the current nonsense with more current nonsense, but of conducting future censuses in a way that produces data that supports the weight people subsequently try to put on it. ("84% of people will be wanting an education for their kids that teaches them things they don't themselves believe in!") Or else, getting people to quit putting that weight on it.

Given the pigheaded attitude of many in this thread in refusing to accept the most glaring of conclusions from any other , perhaps the 2016 census needs to add a supplemental question along the lines of, "if 'Catholic', then: are you a) the authentic Pope-obeying, Holy-Days-of-Obligation-conforming article, b) a Catholic that doesn't believe in god, c) a Catholic that believes nothing that would distinguish themself from a Protestant, or d) a Catholic that just wants a nice quiet life and to get married in their family church and to get their kids into a decent and handy school?"

Piliger · 10-01-2014 03:46AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

It's not simply a matter of supersession the current nonsense with more current nonsense, but of conducting future censuses in a way that produces data that supports the weight people subsequently try to put on it. ("84% of people will be wanting an education for their kids that teaches them things they don't themselves believe in!") Or else, getting people to quit putting that weight on it.

Given the pigheaded attitude of many in this thread in refusing to accept the most glaring of conclusions from any other , perhaps the 2016 census needs to add a supplemental question along the lines of, "if 'Catholic', then: are you a) the authentic Pope-obeying, Holy-Days-of-Obligation-conforming article, b) a Catholic that doesn't believe in god, c) a Catholic that believes nothing that would distinguish themself from a Protestant, or d) a Catholic that just wants a nice quiet life and to get married in their family church and to get their kids into a decent and handy school?"

With respect I think you spend way too much time obsessed with who is and who is not one flavour of religion, a catholic. As an atheist I couldn't give a monkey's sh1t who is what flavour of theism.

I do care about how many are Atheist and how many are theist. End of story.

Hotblack Desiato · 10-01-2014 08:32AM

Piliger wrote: »

I disagree. Teachings religion as a subject of study does not mean they are not secular.

These are secular schools.

That still leaves 98% which are absolutely not secular. Including many VEC schools.

Yet we still have posters coming on here and typing about the existence of 'choice' with a straight face.

Piliger wrote: »

With respect I think you spend way too much time obsessed with who is and who is not one flavour of religion, a catholic. As an atheist I couldn't give a monkey's sh1t who is what flavour of theism.

I used to have that luxury too, until we had kids.

I Heart Internet · 10-01-2014 09:41AM

Piliger wrote: »

But what exactly is a "religious community" ?

A group of people who organise themselves around and share a particular religious affiliation. For the most part, I'm talking about a RCC parish community or similar (group of CoI parishes together or Muslim community in a big city) in practice.

This thread started off about the % of christians in Ireland. Having decided that the census doesn't really do it for them, most contributors have fallen back on the tired arguments that boil down to, "we want to take control of your schools. Your constitutional rights to freedom of religion mean nothing to us, we want your schools." North Korea hear we come.

Delirium · 10-01-2014 09:52AM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

A group of people who organise themselves around and share a particular religious affiliation. For the most part, I'm talking about a RCC parish community or similar (group of CoI parishes together or Muslim community in a big city) in practice.

This thread started off about the % of christians in Ireland. Having decided that the census doesn't really do it for them, most contributors have fallen back on the tired arguments that boil down to, "we want to take control of your schools. Your constitutional rights to freedom of religion mean nothing to us, we want your schools." North Korea hear we come.

Somewhat ironic considering you're defending a school system that condones religious discrimination against both students and teachers.

vibe666 · 10-01-2014 10:26AM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

A group of people who organise themselves around and share a particular religious affiliation. For the most part, I'm talking about a RCC parish community or similar (group of CoI parishes together or Muslim community in a big city) in practice.

This thread started off about the % of christians in Ireland. Having decided that the census doesn't really do it for them, most contributors have fallen back on the tired arguments that boil down to, "we want to take control of your schools. Your constitutional rights to freedom of religion mean nothing to us, we want your schools." North Korea hear we come.

yes of course, wanting everyone nationwide to have equal access, not only to a good education for their children, but also the freedom for any qualified teacher to teach in any school in ireland regardless of religious affiliation is EXACTLY the same as North Korea, I'm glad someone finally came out and said how it really is. :rolleyes:

GarIT · 10-01-2014 10:39AM

I have somewhat of an answer for Catholic but I can't transfer it to Christianity. Catholicism is a confessionalist religion, confessionalist meaning nothing to do with confession but that if you don't agree with any of their teachings you can't fall into the category of Catholic but possibly some Christian denomination. Given that 65% of people would vote in favour of gay marriage there could be a maximum of 35% Catholics in Ireland.

I don't have figures on it but based on contraception use I would say it is likely there is less than 5% Catholics in Ireland.

Brown Bomber · 10-01-2014 11:28AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

Given the pigheaded attitude of many in this thread in refusing to accept the most glaring of conclusions ....

I am quite familiar with conspiracy theories, and that is all the challenge to the census amounts to, a conspiracy theory; and not a very good one. Which is amusing considering the path to atheism is supposedly through reason and so on.

All the elements are there.

1) Alleged wide-scale fraud.
2) Alleged mass-indoctrination
3) Cherry-Picking evidence that best suits the agenda
4) Ignoring the best available evidence when it doesn't fit in with the conspiracy.
5) Hidden forces at play.

CramCycle · 10-01-2014 11:49AM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I am quite familiar with conspiracy theories, and that is all the challenge to the census amounts to, a conspiracy theory; and not a very good one. Which is amusing considering the path to atheism is supposedly through reason and so on.

???WTF is the path to Athiesm, it must be incredibly short as all that is needed is to not believe in a god or gods.

1) Alleged wide-scale fraud.

This is Ireland, you'd be hard pressed to throw a stone in a crowded place and not hit someone who has committed some sort of fraud.

2) Alleged mass-indoctrination

Is that not what the point of the apostilic church is, if your not trying to indoctrinate people, your not really with them.

3) Cherry-Picking evidence that best suits the agenda

Works both ways ie ignoring evidence that doesn't suit an agenda seems to come up alot as well

4) Ignoring the best available evidence when it doesn't fit in with the conspiracy

. No ones ignoring it, they are generally pointing out fallacies within it, ie its not the, pardon the expression, gospel truth :pac:

Brian Shanahan · 10-01-2014 11:52AM

CramCycle wrote: »

???WTF is the path to Athiesm, it must be incredibly short as all that is needed is to not believe in a god or gods.
This is Ireland, you'd be hard pressed to throw a stone in a crowded place and not hit someone who has committed some sort of fraud.
Is that not what the point of the apostilic church is, if your not trying to indoctrinate people, your not really with them.
Works both ways ie ignoring evidence that doesn't suit an agenda seems to come up alot as well
. No ones ignoring it, they are generally pointing out fallicies within it, ie its not the, pardon the expression, gospel truth :pac:

CramCycle one of Brown Bomber's favourite tactics is to take the problems of his own side and try to project them onto his opposition. It's as if he thinks he falsely accuses others of doing what he is doing they'll forget he's doing it and magically start believing everything he says uncritically.

vibe666 · 10-01-2014 12:05PM

lest we also not forget the obvious issues with leaving the RCC in any position of control of a national school system when as a global organisation they were recently uncovered as notoriously responsible for not only the largest case of institutional physical and sexual abuse of children in the world, but also for covering it up at the highest levels of that organisation for almost as many years as they were known to be doing it.

if we were discussing any institution other than the RCC those directly responsible for abuse or for covering it up would have been prosecuted and the institution as a whole immediately removed from anything to do with the education, boarding or guardianship of any children anywhere in the state.

Penn · 10-01-2014 12:16PM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1) Alleged wide-scale fraud.
2) Alleged mass-indoctrination
3) Cherry-Picking evidence that best suits the agenda
4) Ignoring the best available evidence when it doesn't fit in with the conspiracy.
5) Hidden forces at play.

Laughable. No-one is alleging any of that, especially not to that vastly over-dramatised extent. Simply that the census is not exact as the input method is flawed, and people saying "The country is 90% Christian: FACT!" (or more importantly, using it as the basis to push forward their own ideals) are incorrect.

robindch · 10-01-2014 12:17PM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1) Alleged wide-scale fraud.
2) Alleged mass-indoctrination
3) Cherry-Picking evidence that best suits the agenda
4) Ignoring the best available evidence when it doesn't fit in with the conspiracy.
5) Hidden forces at play.

You should read some of the posts in this thread sometime!

GarIT · 10-01-2014 12:31PM

Penncil Dick wrote: »

Simply that the census is not exact as the input method is flawed

I would say the opposite, I think the census is exact but the measurement it gives is not devout Christians but a combination of devout Christians, people that do or don't practice the religion, people who think they are Christian because their parents were etc.

Bannasidhe · 10-01-2014 12:37PM

GarIT wrote: »

I would say the opposite, I think the census is exact but the measurement it gives is not devout Christians but a combination of devout Christians, people that do or don't practice the religion, people who think they are Christian because their parents were etc.

But how can it be exact when posters here have stated that the know people have ticked a box that does not apply?

One simply cannot state that a form filled out by one person on behalf of an entire household which is not checked for accuracy is exact.

Do you imagine many people whose status in Ireland is illegal fill out the census?
Would you say the census is a exact reflection of how many 'illegals' there are?

I seem to recall at the time of the census there was thread after thread of people declaring they would not fill it out. If just one household failed to - it is not an exact record.

Corkfeen · 10-01-2014 12:43PM

Stats being inaccurate isn't a conspiracy theory, there's a particularly credible foundation for the assumption. Bannsaidhe even illustrated points where census' were clearly inaccurate, assume they're conspiracy theories too.

weisses · 10-01-2014 12:47PM

alaimacerc wrote: »

As I've mentioned before, if a survey commissioned by them is good enough for the Conference of Bishops to themselves conclude that over 10% of their fine body of "Catholics" are actually atheists, isn't that a pretty big clue that reported rates of "Catholicism" as a self-identifier are little indication of anything else?

So that's a No then

Figures from the census are used widely, if anybody thinks they are way off then you need to come up with other accepted figures that counter what is in the census.

Penn · 10-01-2014 12:47PM

GarIT wrote: »

I would say the opposite, I think the census is exact but the measurement it gives is not devout Christians but a combination of devout Christians, people that do or don't practice the religion, people who think they are Christian because their parents were etc.

The Census can't be exact because it's not each individual person who fills it in. One person per household is responsible for filling it in for each person in that house at that time. If you can't fill in your own data, it's liable to be filled in incorrectly based on assumptions rather than facts.

GarIT · 10-01-2014 12:50PM

Penncil Dick wrote: »

The Census can't be exact because it's not each individual person who fills it in. One person per household is responsible for filling it in for each person in that house at that time. If you can't fill in your own data, it's liable to be filled in incorrectly based on assumptions rather than facts.

I would highly doubt it is as wrong as people claim though, what are the chances that each time there was an error it was always a religious person filling in a religion for everyone else. There are 84% Catholics in this country, just not devout or practising.

Exactly what percentage of the population is "christian"?

Comments