nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

When aren't you a Catholic?

kneemos

For the purposes of the Census are you still a Catholic even if you don't practice or believe in it?
There's a definite vagueness regarding that particular question I'd have thought.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Zen65

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

A lot of the people making these commandments on here seem to be basing them on quite a rigid view of Catholicism. Yes, there are core beliefs but it's OK to have doubts, it's OK to question your Catholicism and even the best Catholic will go against the teachings of the church at some point in the day.

Yes, the catholic church is OK with this, as long as you repent. Still catholic!

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

Ultimately, it's for each person to describe their faith (or none).

OK, but people can describe themselves incorrectly and not know it. People can believe they are vegetarian because they eat vegetables, and not know that the term only applies if they don't eat meat.

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

However, what amounts to, atheists calling for 'bad' Catholics to be drummed out of the church and into the 'no' box is really a bit rich.

I didn't see anybody calling for anyone to be drummed out of anything. A meat-eater can rightly tell a person who thinks they are vegetarian that they aren't. Understanding is not confined to the believers.

flo8s967qjh0nd

Zen65 wrote: »

People can believe they are vegetarian because they eat vegetables, and not know that the term only applies if they don't eat meat.

That's almost as unbelievable as people forgetting that they are an atheist and ticking the Catholic box by mistake.

One eyed Jack

Zen65 wrote: »

OK, but people can describe themselves incorrectly and not know it. People can believe they are vegetarian because they eat vegetables, and not know that the term only applies if they don't eat meat.

You must be new around here. In this the brave new world of identity politics, people can identify themselves as they choose, and will condemn you from a height if you don't agree with them.

I didn't see anybody calling for anyone to be drummed out of anything. A meat-eater can rightly tell a person who thinks they are vegetarian that they aren't. Understanding is not confined to the believers.

They can, but it takes a whopping amount of righteousness to do it, the exact opposite of the philosophy the same type of people usually espouse. I don't pretend to understand it though, I figure as long as a person isn't a threat to anyone but themselves, they can call themselves a turtle kangaroo for all I care!

Skatedude

Apparently I'm a catholic because i was baptised as as baby and now i have no say in the matter even if I'm an agnostic or the devil himself .

teemxxts

There is no such thing as God. Easy really.

Ush1

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No

It's absolutely nothing to with your opinion on state public policy. For sure your answer will inform and influence state public policy but it doesn't tell the state in any what you feel should be done in relation to public policy. It just tells the state how you choose to define your religious beliefs. That's all. A factual statement about how you define your religious beliefs. Absolutely nothing else.

I can see this isn't going anywhere so I'll just say this.

When filling in a form provided by the state you should ask why are they asking for this information. Its either ignorance or wilful ignorance to ignore the ramifications of the answer. As a previous poster stated the radio advert even mentions it will influence public policy.

This pertains more than ever to a loaded question regarding religion.

Skatedude

teemxxts wrote: »

There is no such thing as God. Easy really.

I agree, but once you have been indoctrinated into the church, then you are not supposed to be allowed to leave, regardless of your beliefs , atheist , agnostic or otherwise, they just dont really allow it. once you were baptized. It's only recently that they kinda acknowledge it.
most religions simply allow to leave if you lose faith but the ctoloc church make you jump through hoops to do so
.
It's not impossible, but unlike most religions, the church make it as difficult as possible.
her's a example http://www.catholicdoors.com/faq/qu286.htm

In most faiths, you can simply choose to leave, but in the catholic faith, you need permission, paperwork etc and then they actually consider that you left,

Dave_The_Sheep

Skatedude wrote: »

It's next to impossible to get the church to allow anyone to leave. Stupid i know, but that's their rule.

Who gives a flying f*ck what the Church think?

Seriously. Plenty of people (even when I was that age) were baptised because it was the 'expected thing' or 'to get into a school' or these days 'it's the done thing, schools'. You think the state should care?

No. The Church can claim whoever it likes. It doesn't make it so.

I was baptised, communised (sp?) and confirmed. I'm not a Catholic, I'm not a Christian. I don't believe in God. I've no problem (in this case) with those who do, but if you don't, or you disagree with another doctrine of Catholic faith, you are not Catholic/Christian. End of story. It's not an eat-what-you-want buffet.

The Catholic Church can claim whatever numbers it likes. If the State has forms that says that people aren't Catholic and the Church says different, **** the Church. Are we a secular state or are we not?

Skatedude

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Who gives a flying f*ck what the Church think?

Seriously. Plenty of people (even when I was that age) were baptised because it was the 'expected thing' or 'to get into a school' or these days 'it's the done thing, schools'. You think the state should care?

No. The Church can claim whoever it likes. It doesn't make it so.

I was baptised, communised (sp?) and confirmed. I'm not a Catholic, I'm not a Christian. I don't believe in God. I've no problem (in this case) with those who do, but if you don't, or you disagree with another doctrine of Catholic faith, you are not Catholic/Christian. End of story. It's not an eat-what-you-want buffet.

The Catholic Church can claim whatever numbers it likes. If the State has forms that says that people aren't Catholic and the Church says different, **** the Church. Are we a secular state or are we not?

Honestly i dont give a feck what the church does or believes, I'd get banned from boards if i said what i really think and what i really know what the church is. I'm just venting at this point as sometimes we need to every now and then. people can believe what they want regardless of how i feel or know. I hate the church for a reason, but that's my reason and not everyone's.
Belief is important to people, even if we dont always agree in what to believe in.

K, mores beers and less talk, Later all.

Jayop

No issues with your views on the church at all but surely if you want to leave then you just don't go back. For a firm non believer it should be akin to being a member in Xtra vision and stopping going there. They'd still have you down as a member but who gives a ****.

Skatedude

Jayop wrote: »

No issues with your views on the church at all but surely if you want to leave then you just don't go back. For a firm non believer it should be akin to being a member in Xtra vision and stopping going there. They'd still have you down as a member but who gives a ****.

In most religions , yes , but the catholic church dont really believe you can leave, regardless of your changed beliefs, once baptized, it's for life.
google it.

Speedwell

Hey, everyone on this thread is now a member of this "Thread Club" I just started. And nothing you can do will take you off the rolls. I've left instructions in my will. Muahahahaha.

AudreyHepburn

I think it's up to each person to make up their own mind what category they fall into....it's not for me or anyone else to tell them what name they can or can't give themselves.

OP just tick whichever box feels right to you....it's nobody's business but your own what you identify as.

looksee

Everyone should answer this question, whether or not they have a religion.

This question is not about frequency of attendance at church or other place of worship. 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.

If the person has a religion they can identify that religion by ticking one of the tick box categories, or by writing in a description of your religion or beliefs in the write-in boxes.

If they do not have a religion – they should go to the end of the question and mark the ‘no religion’ box.

Quoted from http://census.ie/the-census-and-you/each-question-in-detail/

Zen65

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

That's almost as unbelievable as people forgetting that they are an atheist and ticking the Catholic box by mistake.

It's not a hypothetical situation (believe it or not) - I actually encountered a college student who believed they were vegetarian despite eating meat regularly.

flo8s967qjh0nd

Zen65 wrote: »

It's not a hypothetical situation (believe it or not) - I actually encountered a college student who believed they were vegetarian despite eating meat regularly.

College student? God help us all

Speedwell

Heh, let's not turn this thread into "when aren't you a vegetarian". I'm stopping this right here because otherwise I might have many words to say on that subject

[Deleted User]

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

I stand to be corrected, but the order is presumably dictated by the responses from the previous census. That's how I always read it anyway.

That would be a colossally stupid way to do it.

In Ireland we have a lot of people (I am one) who are 'sort of' Catholic but are also not really catholic at all. I would say something pretty close to 50% of the population were baptised and brought up Catholic but don't really consider themselves to be religious and certainly are not observant.

The way the question is currently designed is quite evidently a way to make sure as many of those people just tick 'catholic' and move on. The fact that the meaningful alternative to catholic for those people is hidden below the 'other' box is pretty scandalous.

That is why the design is so flawed. It really is a bit of a joke that something as important as the census doesn't appear to involve the input of professionals when it comes to how the questions are worded and laid out

nozzferrahhtoo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They can, but it takes a whopping amount of righteousness to do it

As was explained to you before though, this depends entirely on context.

In the context of an official state form used for the public benefit of having public information that could affect our entire society, I see nothing "rude" or "righteous" or any of the other words you keep using in asking people to be sure they know what the terms mean on the form.... and that they are using them correctly.

Even outside such contexts however..... while I have no time for extreme linguistic pedantry or grammar nazis or any of that.... there is something to be said for having SOME semblance of policing words and phrases.

Communication is founded on words at least APPROACHING some kind of universal meaning. If words could mean whatever the hell we want them to, communication would be impossible. It is already hard enough sometimes with the vagaries of current meanings to words.

So if someone calls themselves vegetarian or catholic but the attributes of that person show CLEARLY they are using the term erroneously, I see no harm in pointing that out. No harm at all. Let alone rudeness or righteousness or any of the other issues you seem to have with it.

Language requires at least SOME level of coherence, and that is reason enough to sometimes comment on the misuse of terms and labels. Further sometimes it is just a kindness to stop someone continuing to look like an idiot. If someone eating meat thinks they are a vegetarian, I would correct them on that. Not just to protect the meaning of the word vegetarian, but to protect THEM from being judged as an outright idiot by others.

flo8s967qjh0nd

Deleted User wrote: »

The way the question is currently designed is quite evidently a way to make sure as many of those people just tick 'catholic' and move on.

Why would it be designed in such a way? Are you suggesting the Central Statistics Office is involved in a conspiracy to produce erroneous census results? That's a pretty serious claim to be making.

[Deleted User]

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

Why would it be designed in such a way? Are you suggesting the Central Statistics Office is involved in a conspiracy to produce erroneous census results? That's a pretty serious claim to be making.

I have no idea if there is a conspiracy, but I know (not claim) that the question as asked will give erroneous results, it is obvious to anyone with any knowledge of survey design.

Speedwell

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

Why would it be designed in such a way? Are you suggesting the Central Statistics Office is involved in a conspiracy to produce erroneous census results?

Yes. Any competent survey expert who hasn't been living under a rock for the past 25 years can put two and two together, here. There is a right way and a wrong way to design a question like this, and they chose the wrong way and refuse to fix it.

That's a pretty serious claim to be making.

Remember we're talking about an easily manipulable document and easily manipulated politicians.

nozzferrahhtoo

Atheist Ireland have approached them about changing the census form before. And their usual excuse they return to us for not making changes is something about backward compatibility with previous results, and their ability to compare and contrast results over time if any changes are made to the document.

Now this is not a good excuse really, so I am not playing devils advocate or anything here. Just to let you know what THEIR stock answer for not making coherent changes like the one you describe above is.

beach_walker

Speedwell wrote: »

Remember we're talking about an easily manipulable document and easily manipulated politicians.

The CSO is an independent office. Ye're making outlandish claims here lads, of all the shysters in the State I don't think the CSO has ever been brought into disrepute.

Speedwell

beach_walker wrote: »

The CSO is an independent office. Ye're making outlandish claims here lads, of all the shysters in the State I don't think the CSO has ever been brought into disrepute.

Scratch a politician and find... a politician.

beach_walker

Alia Yummy Bee wrote: »

Why would it be designed in such a way? Are you suggesting the Central Statistics Office is involved in a conspiracy to produce erroneous census results? That's a pretty serious claim to be making.

Well it's never too early to get them excuses ready.

[Deleted User]

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Atheist Ireland have approached them about changing the census form before. And their usual excuse they return to us for not making changes is something about backward compatibility with previous results, and their ability to compare and contrast results over time if any changes are made to the document.

Now this is not a good excuse really, so I am not playing devils advocate or anything here. Just to let you know what THEIR stock answer for not making coherent changes like the one you describe above is.

To be fair, that is a decent answer.

It is 100% true that if they changed the layout of this question today you would see a significant change in the results and that would make mapping of trends etc difficult.

I am not involved in Atheist Ireland etc but if I was and there was funding, I would commission a piece of independent research, correctly worded and phrased, that used the census preamble (actually a postamble in the census, which is also revealing) to the effect of "we are asking about your current religious views" etc.

Then I would publicise the results that would almost certainly reveal that the census numbers that get bandied about are hopelessly inaccurate because based on a misleading and poorly worded question. And every time the '85% of Irish people are catholics' line came up, I would firmly correct it.

Speedwell

beach_walker wrote: »

Well it's never too early to get them excuses ready.

Do you know something the rest of us don't?

[Deleted User]

beach_walker wrote: »

The CSO is an independent office. Ye're making outlandish claims here lads, of all the shysters in the State I don't think the CSO has ever been brought into disrepute.

To have reached 2016 and still have this 'surely not!' attitude to ANY public (or private) body in Ireland is naive in the extreme.

The Randy Riverbeast

It does look like they put them in the same order as Mary in the office came up with them. Not a conspiracy but poor survey making methods. Of course I assume one of the usuals will be along shortly to claim I think lizard people behind it or ignore it as I already said it is very doubtful that I would be a conspiracy.