Christian Institute misses the point of the Census Campaign
In an article accusing humanists of missing the point of the census religion question, the Christian Institute takes the time to explain that:
The BHA is missing the point. The census question does not seek to measure religious devotion or practice, it simply measures affiliation.
Funnily enough this point is far from “missed” by the BHA’s Census Campaign. Under the heading “What does the Census really measure?” the Census Campaign website says:
However, the high percentage of people who ticked the ‘Christian’ box, coupled with falling Church attendance and evidence from other surveys on belief and practice, suggests that the question actually measures a vague cultural affiliation…
It’s the immediately subsequent point that is actually the point of the Census Campaign, and the beef with the religion question, namely that vague cultural affiliation is:
– something that does not affect people’s needs with regard to policy.
And the problem is that sometimes the census data is used exactly as if the ‘religion’ answers were meaningful.
So we all agree that cultural affiliation is (at best) what the Census can be said to measure. Can we now all agree that obviously this will mean that Census religion findings and vague nominal affiliations won’t be used when it comes to defending social attitudes or informing policy formation or allocating funding? That’s the point.
Christian Institute misses the point of the Census Campaign,7 Comments
Trackbacks
- Latest Religion News News | Religion
- Michelle Bachmann & the Tea Party | Christianity
- Imagine, no religion » societypolitics
As a Christian I entirely agree that previously the religion question couldn’t be reliably used to support the faith affiliations of people because so many people of nominal religious affiliation ticked the “Christian” box. Anecdotally I would guess that around 10% of the UK population are committed and active Christians. I would also guess that only around 2% of the population are committed and actiuve secularists.
But if the BHAs campaign is effective (which is presumably the point of the campaign) then the new data (which given that only the BHA has really campaigned on this issue should show a decline in religious affiliation) can be considered more accurate and thus could be used for policy making?
So, for example, if, following a widely publicised campaign to tick “no religion” the number of those ticking Christianity falls to, let’s say, 55% and the number of those ticking “no religion” rises to 25% you could suggest that in fact there are too few (rather than too many) religiously affiliated people in public life, too few faith schools etc in proportion to the whole population.
Or, alternatively, if after the 2011 Census the BHA continues to trot out the line that that many of those who tick the “Christian” box are merely nominal they will also have to concede that many of those who tick the “No religion” box are only nominally secular. This means those people can be considered as averse to the fairly “fundamentalist” secularism of the BHA as the nominal Christians are to the “fundamentalist” Christianity of, say, Christian Voice.
Bottom line: the BHF need to avoid the danger of trying to have it’s cake and eat it!
Andrew, the point is that there are policies and practices in place which favour the religious. Conversely there are no policies and practices in place that explicitly favour the secular.
There are no specifically secular appointees in the House of Lords, so the prevalence of religious belief in the House will, if there are no other influencing factors, broadly tend to represent the prevalence of religious belief in the population as a whole. That is it would, except that we do have specifically religious appointees, namely Anglican bishops.
Similarly, I’m not aware of any “Church of the New Atheism” academies, just normal schools going about their normal business of educating children in stuff that we know to be true. However, there are schools with very specific religious agendas that nevertheless receive public money.
These things are demonstrably inequitable, but are maintained in part by an alleged justification on the basis of purported numbers of religious adherents.
If you can give examples of any parts of public life where secularists are given special advantages, then we have the basis for a discussion. If, as I suspect, there are none then your argument falls.
Also happy to hear any evidence in support of your characterisation of the BHA’s secularism as “fundamentalist “. Applying a label doesn’t make it true.
What the bible says about the census (Old testament 1 Chronicles 21:1-28″)
1 Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel
7 God was very displeased with the census, and he punished Israel for it.
8 Then David said to God, “I have sinned greatly by taking this census. Please forgive my guilt for doing this foolish thing.”
As it stands Houses have been marked with census number … what will they mark next??? Will they try to mark our bodies, the temple of God???….
What the future holds according to the Book of Revelation
New Testament Revelation 13:1-16
7And the beast was allowed to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And he was given authority to rule over every tribe and people and language and nation.
8And all the people who belong to this world worshiped the beast. They are the ones whose names were not written in the Book of Life before the world was made—the Book that belongs to the Lamb who was slaughtered.b
9Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand.
10Anyone who is destined for prison will be taken to prison. Anyone destined to die by the sword will die by the sword. This means that God’s holy people must endure persecution patiently and remain faithful.
16He required everyone—small and great, rich and poor, free and slave—to be given a mark on the right hand or on the forehead.
17And no one could buy or sell anything without that mark, which was either the name of the beast or the number representing his name.
18Wisdom is needed here. Let the one with understanding solve the meaning of the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man.c His number is 666.
Revelation 14
9 Then a third angel followed them, shouting, “Anyone who worships the beast and his statue or who accepts his mark on the forehead or on the hand
10 must drink the wine of God’s anger. It has been poured full strength into God’s cup of wrath. And they will be tormented with fire and burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb.
11 The smoke of their torment will rise forever and ever, and they will have no relief day or night, for they have worshiped the beast and his statue and have accepted the mark of his name.”
12 This means that God’s holy people must endure persecution patiently, obeying his commands and maintaining their faith in Jesus.
Be wise and make the right choices!
“Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand”
I have and I’ve understood. You’re totally bonkers!
I presume you have paid the £1000 fine.