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.

instead of no religion can we all write jedi again?

Hotblack Desiato

Ryker Colossal Vinegar 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.

Cherry Blossom

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

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.

I missed the no religion option two censuses ago because of how it was placed on the form. All people want is the right to educate their kids without having religion rammed down their throats, the right to be sick in hospital without some priest up your face trying to persuade you to come to the hospital chapel as happened to me. In my own case, the right to be burried in a grave yard not associated with a particular church. Such a thing does not exist at all in Donegal. It was a bloody nightmare when my dad died four and a half years ago trying to decide what to do as my mother was vehemently against cremation. There are loads of services in the country for the religious that are in line with their beliefs that we don't have. All people are trying to do is to encourage those who don't practice a religion to convey that on the census form, people of a certain set of beliefs who tend to buckle under peer pressure or are misinformed as to the option they 'must' pick.

robp

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

I missed the no religion option two censuses ago because of how it was placed on the form. All people want is the right to educate their kids without having religion rammed down their throats, the right to be sick in hospital without some priest up your face trying to persuade you to come to the hospital chapel as happened to me. In my own case, the right to be burried in a grave yard not associated with a particular church. Such a thing does not exist at all in Donegal. It was a bloody nightmare when my dad died four and a half years ago trying to decide what to do as my mother was vehemently against cremation. There are loads of services in the country for the religious that are in line with their beliefs that we don't have. All people are trying to do is to encourage those who don't practice a religion to convey that on the census form, people of a certain set of beliefs who tend to buckle under peer pressure or are misinformed as to the option they 'must' pick.

If an atheist ticks the catholic box because they don't see a non religion box it would raise the question as to what kind of atheist they are. Religion is shoved down no one's throats. You are living in the past.

wokingvoter

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

I missed the no religion option two censuses ago because of how it was placed on the form. All people want is the right to educate their kids without having religion rammed down their throats, the right to be sick in hospital without some priest up your face trying to persuade you to come to the hospital chapel as happened to me. In my own case, the right to be burried in a grave yard not associated with a particular church. Such a thing does not exist at all in Donegal. It was a bloody nightmare when my dad died four and a half years ago trying to decide what to do as my mother was vehemently against cremation. There are loads of services in the country for the religious that are in line with their beliefs that we don't have. All people are trying to do is to encourage those who don't practice a religion to convey that on the census form, people of a certain set of beliefs who tend to buckle under peer pressure or are misinformed as to the option they 'must' pick.

I've got the census form in front of me. All you have to do is tick 7. No religion
Sorry about your dad. Woodland burial?

Cherry Blossom

I read down the list of religions until I came to the space that said 'other' and wrote none.

My dad is buried in a graveyard that is supposedly multi-dominational but is attached to a COI church. He could not be buried there without the graveside service, the actual funeral consisted of gathering in a community hall where 8 or so family members, friends and work colleagues talked about his life and their personal memories.

12Phase

robp wrote: »

If an atheist ticks the catholic box because they don't see a non religion box it would raise the question as to what kind of atheist they are. Religion is shoved down no one's throats. You are living in the past.

My mum was in hospital just a few weeks ago and had some creepy old lady coming around offering her communion despite being told not to.

Still happens.

robp

12Phase wrote: »

My mum was in hospital just a few weeks ago and had some creepy old lady coming around offering her communion despite being told not to.

Still happens.

Being offered a religious service is a million miles away having it forced upon ones self. Freedom of religion isn't freedom from religion or exposure to any other idea one dislikes.

eviltwin

robp wrote: »

If an atheist ticks the catholic box because they don't see a non religion box it would raise the question as to what kind of atheist they are. Religion is shoved down no one's throats. You are living in the past.

I think some people were genuinely confused by the question. It nearly caused world war three in my house because my baptised husband insisted on ticking Catholic even though he hadn't been to church since his teens. He thought the No Religion option was only for people who weren't baptised. I'm glad they've included that explanation about the information they want in the new form, it will hopefully stop anyone complaining about the results.

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

I think some people were genuinely confused by the question. It nearly caused world war three in my house because my baptised husband insisted on ticking Catholic even though he hadn't been to church since his teens. He thought the No Religion option was only for people who weren't baptised. I'm glad they've included that explanation about the information they want in the new form, it will hopefully stop anyone complaining about the results.

I have no doubt some people were genuinely confused over the question, but I imagine even with the way the explanation is now included, it won't alter the results all that much at all (if indeed at all), because like your husband, people will still consider themselves as they were baptised and will likely tick RC out of habit more than anything else. I was in the in-laws house the night of the census and none of them are religious.

The religion question was the least bloody confusing of the whole lot! :pac:

meeeeh

My partner is lapsed Catholic and we usually thick no religion. However if he would think this will influence who runs local school I am not so certain he wouldn't thick catholic for himself (I would still do no religion).

Choochtown

Questions 9, 14, 15, 16, 22 and 24 are all Yes/ No questions. If you tick the Yes box you are instructed to proceed to a follow-up question.

eg. Can you speak Irish? ... Followed by "If 'Yes' do you speak Irish..." Daily/Weekly etc.

A sensible question as not everyone in the country speaks Irish. The other questions listed above follow the same format.

However question 12 presumes that everyone has a religion and that is why it is very misleading in my opinion.

Surely it would make perfect sense to ask...

"Do you practice a religion?"
"If 'Yes' tick one of the following boxes ...

It's very disingenuous to suggest that question 12 is not misleading for people with eg. reading difficulties. The "No religion" option is tucked away at the end after the "other" option and the 20 white boxes to fill in the other. At first glance your choice is Roman Catholic, Church of Ireland, Islam, Presbyterian, Orthodox or other. No wonder non-practicing Catholics automatically tick the first box.

Pherekydes

12Phase wrote: »

My mum was in hospital just a few weeks ago and had some creepy old lady coming around offering her communion despite being told not to.

Still happens.

My wife was on a day ward last Friday and a woman came around and offered everyone (about 10-12 patients) communion. All declined. Funnily enough, there's a big sign on the door saying no visitors, patients only.

Choochtown

A couple of questions ...

1. Why is there no explanatory notes on this contentious question at the back of the form?

2. Why is Roman Catholic listed first? (After answering that you can see the big problem with the layout)

One eyed Jack

Choochtown wrote: »

Questions 9, 14, 15, 16, 22 and 24 are all Yes/ No questions. If you tick the Yes box you are instructed to proceed to a follow-up question.

eg. Can you speak Irish? ... Followed by "If 'Yes' do you speak Irish..." Daily/Weekly etc.

A sensible question as not everyone in the country speaks Irish. The other questions listed above follow the same format.

However question 12 presumes that everyone has a religion and that is why it is very misleading in my opinion.

Surely it would make perfect sense to ask...

"Do you practice a religion?"
"If 'Yes' tick one of the following boxes ...

It's very disingenuous to suggest that question 12 is not misleading for people with eg. reading difficulties. The "No religion" option is tucked away at the end after the "other" option and the 20 white boxes to fill in the other. At first glance your choice is Roman Catholic, Church of Ireland, Islam, Presbyterian, Orthodox or other. No wonder non-practicing Catholics automatically tick the first box.

How is it not disingenuous to suggest that question 12 is any more misleading for people with reading difficulties than anyone else? It's disingenuous to suggest that it is any more difficult for someone with reading difficulties to fill out the form as though that could offer a plausible explanation for why such a high percentage of the population could answer every other question on the form accurately, but the religion question?

"Oh reading difficulties, mammy, granny <insert other relative> must have filled out the form, ohh... etc, etc", any reason, no matter how ridiculous it seems, to explain what you feel is that one single discrepancy. It must be a discrepancy sure, because in your world you don't allow for the possibility that people can actually think for themselves, and answer for themselves. They aren't so illiterate that they are incapable of reading and understanding a simple question.

If you think people actually are generally that illiterate, then religion isn't the biggest social issue that needs to be tackled as a result of the census. It's the shocking poor standard of literacy in this country.

Choochtown

One eyed Jack wrote: »

How is it disingenuous to suggest that question 12 is any more misleading for people with reading difficulties than anyone else? It's disingenuous to suggest that it is any more difficult for someone with reading difficulties to fill out the form as though that could offer a plausible explanation for why such a high percentage of the population could answer every other question on the form accurately, but the religion question?

"Oh reading difficulties, mammy, granny <insert other relative> must have filled out the form, ohh... etc, etc", any reason, no matter how ridiculous it seems, to explain what you feel is that one single discrepancy. It must be a discrepancy sure, because in your world you don't allow for the possibility that people can actually think for themselves, and answer for themselves. They aren't so illiterate that they are incapable of reading and understanding a simple question.



If you think people actually are generally that illiterate, then religion isn't the biggest social issue that needs to be tackled as a result of the census. It's the shocking poor standard of literacy in this country.

Because question 12 is the only question on the form to

1. Have a long list of options followed by an "other" option followed by 20 white boxes to declare the other before the final option.

2. Have the 2nd most popular answer tucked away at the end.

nomdeboardie

Absolam wrote: »

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.

I think they probably only prosecute for complete refusal, which would be consistant with the small number nabbed - nothing like the number who appear in the stats as not answering individual questions.

+ This post from last time suggests only a small number of Qs are compulsory.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Hotblack Desiato

robp wrote: »

Being offered a religious service is a million miles away having it forced upon ones self. Freedom of religion isn't freedom from religion or exposure to any other idea one dislikes.

Yet people are asked their religion on admission, and this stuff still happens to people who have already specified they don't want it. It happened to me.

And yes freedom of religion means freedom from religion from those who do not wish to be subjected to it, a hospital patient is the definition of a captive audience.

One eyed Jack

Choochtown wrote: »

Because question 12 is the only question on the form to

1. Have a long list of options followed by an "other" option followed by 20 white boxes to declare the other before the final option.

2. Have the 2nd most popular answer tucked away at the end.

I'm just going to presume you're serious and actually give you the benefit of the doubt, but nothing in the above would provide a plausible explanation for the high percentage of people who filled out the census accurately on every other question, but that one single question. How could they possibly understand such an exhaustive list of options and a question so straightforward that the only people complaining about any possible confusion, appear to be those people of no religion.

I've struggled to read the menu in McDonalds a lot more than I've struggled with that one single question, and as I mentioned above, it was actually the least contentious or confusing question on the form in my in-laws that night.

Choochtown

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

How do you know this? Where is that information given?

My form says " you are obliged by law to complete and return this form"

byhookorbycrook

Can we not trust people to be able to read the form and answer honestly?