[Closed] Cameron states "Britain is still a Christian country"

For the record, all four of us in this house are Christian on the 2011 data. Only one actually is.

And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, a girl sitting on her own in a small cafe in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything.

DNA had it right many years ago.

Not because they're stupid, but because the question is badly worded.

Q.20 [b]What is your religion?[/b]

Yes, it really could be much clearer, couldn't it, very ambiguous?

And what was the first option?

[] No Religion

So, the first box you could tick, was no religion, but most people chose to carry on to the next box, and tick Christian - its clearly a terribly designed question!

Not really - not all of them. If you marry within a christian tradition for instance- either church wedding or a secular registry office one, thats quite a different contract to, for instance, a Mormon one. A british secular marriage is a different legal contract to a jewish one or an islamic one. Even as an unmarried atheist my relationship still has more in common with christian marriage than some other traditions. Even areas where morals choices don't seem to apply - like finance and lending differ from one religious tradition to another.

And if ultimately religions had all the same morals and behaviours in common then there'd be a lot less fuss and bother than we seem to experience

But I don't think the Christian tradition 'claims' any traditions as its own to the exclusions of all others. Mormons aren't stuck with polygamy because the pope called bagsey on monogamy. I'm not barred from being charitable because I haven't been baptised.

Firstly, Mormons [i]are[/i] Christians 🙂

I don't dispute that we're not a culturally-Christian country, but many of our 'Christian' traditions would be unrecognisable to Christ.

Well if the question were worded "do you have a religion?" I'd guess that the answers would be different. The one in the census starts with the assumption that the person answering does have a religion.

Not because they're stupid, but because the question is badly worded.

Q.20 What is your religion?

Yes, it really could be much clearer, couldn't it, very ambiguous?

And what was the first option?

[] No Religion

So, the first box you could tick, was no religion, but most people chose to carry on to the next box, and tick Christian - its clearly a terribly designed question!

Thought process:

What's my religion? Mmm, dunno really. I was Christened, so I must be a Christian. [i]*tick*[/i]

Thought process: What's my religion? Mmm, dunno really. I was Christened, so I must be a Christian. *tick*

Yet, just a few minutes ago you said:

Not because they're stupid

So which is it?

Because despite the difficulty of the question, at least full quarter of the population managed to work out the nuance and tick the 'no religion' box. it can only have been the stupid ones who didn't manage to work it out I suppose...

Firstly, Mormons are Christians

but they're not C of E

I was Christened, so I must be a Christian.

being christened /baptised is a minimum entry requirement for organised formal participation in that religion - its up to you if you think that marks you are indelibly christian for the rest of you life. I'd be surprised if thats how most people approached the question, it seems to be an act of pedantry. I think most people would identify themselves as christian if thats what they think they are.

Like I said I'm not christened, but I wasn't even really aware of it until relatively recently - when it came to light when someone libelled my dad and my non-christened status was required to refute an allegation.

Because despite the difficulty of the question, at least full quarter of the population managed to work out the nuance and tick the 'no religion' box. it can only have been the stupid ones who didn't manage to work it out I suppose...

How much thought and effort do you think people put into filling in the census form?

Why is there such a disconnect between the census data, church attendance and the results of polls?

Mormons are Christians

but they're not C of E

You didn't specify that. Neither are many (most?) Christians.

Where's the bit about Jesus saying that invading other countries for profit was part of his belief system?

How about forming churches using his brand to make money and instil fear and control in their subjects?

And I certainly don't remember Jesus saying that sexual abuse of youngsters by people in positions of power, so that other people in power could then blackmail and manipulate them was the core of a healthy society...

That said, there is certainly a lot of good, caring and considerate folk in day to day life, so many of the positive virtues of the biblical accounts of a man who may or may not have existed are still doing good things.

Why is there such a disconnect between the census data, church attendance and the results of polls?

So, you can only be Christian if you go to church?

Can you only be Muslim if you never drink alcohol, or Jewish if you never eat ham? Or is it accepted that you can still be 'of the faith' without strictly observing every tenet of the rules in your day to day life

As for the polls, well, isn't the census just a very intensive, exhaustively conducted poll, asking everyone rather than just a representative sample of about a thousand. Why do you think asking 1000 people 'what is your religion?' is going to be magically more accurate than asking everyone the same question?

Why is there such a disconnect between the census data, church attendance and the results of polls?

There are various reasons why those figures would vary. Someone might consider themselves a church going christian if they go to church on christmas eve and easter sunday. Someone might consider themselves christian of they grew up in a church going family, someone might just consider themselves christian and see no need to join a club to express that. The question in the census doesn't ask if you are a little bit christian ore really really christian. My gf's dad goes to church pretty much every day - he counts as 7 christians on the church attendance figures (or as 365 midnight mass goers), but only as one on the census.

So, you can only be Christian if you go to church?

Not at all, and I didn't say otherwise.

Can you only be Muslim if you never drink alcohol, or Jewish if you never eat ham? Or is it accepted that you can still be 'of the faith' without strictly observing every tenet of the rules in your day to day life

Again, where did I say otherwise?

As for the polls, well, isn't the census just a very intensive, exhaustively conducted poll, asking everyone rather than just a representative sample of about a thousand. Why do you think asking 1000 people 'what is your religion' is going to be magically more accurate than asking everyone the same question?

The census asks just one question on religion, so provides very little insight into what people actually believe. As you show yourself, it is very difficult to define what makes someone a member of a particular religion.

Ed Milliband is Jewish, and an atheist.
Dara Ó Briain described him self as an atheist then added "but still a Catholic".
I'm baptised Anglican and am on the electoral roll of the local Anglican church, but I'm an atheist and not a Christian.
According to [url= http://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/files/files/Post%20Religious%20Britain%20pdf.pdf ]this Theos report[/url], 11% of atheists described themselves as Christians.

Many people use a religious label as a basis of their cultural identity, rather than as a religious identity. Most practising members of these religions would not recognise these people as members of that faith. When pushed, most of these people wouldn't accept the central tenets of the faith.

When pushed, most of these people wouldn't accept the central tenets of the faith.

Who's to decide which is central?

Hell, the CofE as we know it was founded on the very basis of rejecting one of the central tenets of the faith.

Thats why self identification is the only measure that works, because ultimately its a deeply personal question between you and your own gods, not anyone else.

Who's to decide which is central?

Hell, the CofE as we know it was founded on the very basis of rejecting one of the central tenets of the faith.

Thats why self identification is the only measure that works, because ultimately its a deeply personal question between you and your own gods, not anyone else.

This self identifying question in the census is used as justification for retaining the CofE's current role as an established church, with its associated positions in the Lords.

The fact that faith can be so personal and varied is one argument for disestablishment, and a reason why our elected officials shouldn't make pronouncements of the kinds Cameron has made several times recently.

According to this Theos report, 11% of atheists described themselves as Christians.

I can see why they would - I would describe my self as atheist within a christian tradition, but I wouldn't go as far as to call myself a christian.

Many people use a religious label as a basis of their cultural identity,

When pushed, most of these people wouldn't accept the central tenets of the faith.

Indeed. The church isn't a democracy though. The congregation has to take what they want from the sermon and make their own choices about what and how they apply them to their daily life. They can choose to differ in their opinion but its not really up to them to change the message

If you take the whole of the bible you'd drive yourself insane trying to literally observe and apply every single word and sentence of it to your living, working life. So you have to choose what to take from it. The reason why we have a multitude of christian traditions rather than one church - a 'catholic' church in the literal sense of universal - is that in any place and at any time people make different choices as to what elements of the bible to embrace.

But because churches are top-down authorities rather than bottom up democracies the institutions change much more slowly than the congregations.

mccruiskeen - you're misreading the Obama church dilemma. It was not about religion - it was about race and the "community activist" Chicago democratic machine. Obama was asked to choose between his initial political support base and a political path that seemed easier in the short term. Obama joined the church because it gave him local credibility; he had never been particularly religious before and his wife had had some other affiliation iirc.

It was not a "when did you stop beating your wife?" question either - it was a perfectly reasonable one: if you say you worship at this church and follow this pastor, then does that mean you agree with the pastor of the church when he says X, Y and Z?

Think the question was fairly clear on the census...and the majority identified themselves with the christian religion. It would have been just as easy to to tick the no religion box.

Not saying that makes them religious, but clearly shows that the majority identify themselves in some way with the christian faith, or at least the fact that they live in a christian country. Which ties in with Cameron's point quite nicely.

All in my opinion however...I'm sure someone will quickly be along to tell me I'm wrong.

Even as an unmarried atheist my relationship still has more in common with christian marriage than some other traditions.

Between 2001 and 2011 there has been a decrease in people who identify as Christian (from 71.7 per cent to 59.3 per cent) and an increase in those reporting no religion (from 14.8 per cent to 25.1 per cent).

It's a declining majority - heading for more non-Christians than Christians by the 2021 census?

Considering it's only 15 generations or so since one type of Christian was burning the 'wrong' type of Christian, that's quite a change.

im with the aussie
[img] ?oh=244ab1dc2245fb87657c8d34927f8196&oe=53DC67ED[/img]

If Britain is not a Christian country, why is the head of state the head of the C of E ?

Leaving aside the fact that England does not equal Britain, the point about the head if state answers the question in the strictest constitutional sense and doesn't add anything to the wider point about how the country actually operates.

A lot of emphasis on the old census form here. But not everyone takes part; those who've fallen through the cracks, those who don't have time to be filling out lengthy forms for free, and those who simply don't trust the government to not sell or use the information for nefarious ends.

I guess 'God-fearing' folk are exactly the type of people that willingly give away personal information to the authorities no questions asked. Seems to suggest a bias to me...

I also agree with the opinion that a lot of people just tick 'Christian' out of ignorance. They're christened, get married in a church and buried in a churchyard etc.

Well, unless some 5 million or so people fell through the cracks, and all of them were none christians, the data still says that they culturally or religiously identified themselves as Christian, so the point still stands.

This may just be me but can someone explain what a "cultural" Christian is and how it is different from just being a decent person?

Thank heavens ( see what i did there) Cameron has the backing of the church of England. Oh, apart from the forty five bishops(that is over half of all of the c of e bishops in post at the present time, fact fans) who signed an open letter about food banks and what they see as a welfare crisis, that is. That loony leftist rag the telegraph even dared to insinuate that this might be one factor in his recent outpourings of christian values....

[url= http://http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10772993/It-shouldnt-be-a-surprise-that-David-Cameron-has-got-religion.html ]Telegraph[/url]

Ninfan, is Cameron not risking votes reminding all those christians how christian they really are, when so many christian leaders are such a thorn in his side?

This may just be me but can someone explain what a "cultural" Christian is and how it is different from just being a decent person?

A cultural Christian is someone raised in a culture where nominally-Christian festivals are celebrated and nominally-Christian values are the norm. They will have experienced broadly-Christian acts of worship at school, and when family weddings and funerals happen they will probably be in a church.

It's got nothing at all to do with behaviour.

Hmm well that describes my up bringing but it's certainly not how I would describe myself and I wouldn't like to be considered any sort of Christian, cultural or otherwise.

Ninfan, is Cameron not risking votes reminding all those christians how christian they really are, when so many christian leaders are such a thorn in his side?

Probably no more so than discussing Islam:

But ninfan you were just reminding us how many of us really [i]are [/i]christian according to the last census. Imagine upsetting the compassionate and selfless christian values of even a small proportion of them.... How many hindus and muslims were there on that census you quoted again?
[edit] saved you the trouble going back one page: if i was cameron identifying that religious leaders were taking umbrage to my policies, i would rather be unsettling the 2.7 million next largest religious group you identified in your link than the 33 million christians we apparently have.

I've not watched those three Youtube videos, but presumably Cameron and Milliband are just issuing bland Happy Holidays-style greetings, rather than talking about their experiences of being a Muslim/Hindu, which Muslim/Hindu services they attend, how the leader of their mosque/temple was a great help to them during a difficult time, or how we should be evangelical about being a Muslim/Hindu country?

Dydno-rod aside (wine plus absence of pre-written spin, i am sure), I also doubt cameron is likening muslim or hindu vales to conservative political ones, or likening welfare reform and the big society to the teachings or actions of mohammad or krishna.

Ooh, a religion thread, has it been a week already?

Think the question was fairly clear on the census

The problem with the census question is not that it's unclear, or vague, or difficult to understand, or any other random description anyone cares to make up and attribute to the godless; the problem with the question is that it is [i]leading.[/i] It assumes a default position of some form of theism.

Why is that an issue? Well, because many people will identify as Christian when pressed, by nature of being what was elegantly explained earlier as "cultural" Christians (to wit, our national holidays are Christmas and Easter rather than Eid and Ramadan), irrespective or whether they actually hold any religious beliefs at all. And that skews the figures.

By way of example: if I went into town with a clipboard, asked a hundred people "what is your religion?" (as per the census) and noted the results, then did the same the next day asking "do you consider yourself religious?", I would expect very differing results. Specifically, I would expect a considerably higher percentage of people to tell me they weren't religious in reply to the second question than to the first.

If Britain is not a Christian country, why is the head of state the head of the C of E ?

If I owned a cats' home and a dogs' home, would that make all the dogs cats?

Cameron doesn't actually believe any of this guff. He's just doing it to 1: keep his core right-wing back-benchers quiet and 2: try and get some votes back from UKIP.

Mind you, with the imminent posting of their latest anti-immigration banners, UKIP have been caught behind the news - apparently, living standards are now so good in Poland that none of the Polish are interested in coming here any more...

Shame - they've wasted £1 million on a pointless campaign about a non-issue.

he's so Christian that his constituency office called the police when a Bishop came to visit them;

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-camerons-constituency-office-calls-police-on-food-bank-campaigners-bishop-of-oxford-and-reverend-keith-hebden-9274303.html ]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-camerons-constituency-office-calls-police-on-food-bank-campaigners-bishop-of-oxford-and-reverend-keith-hebden-9274303.html[/url]

I believe in HiFi magic - you know, directional cables, high value interconnects and so on. Unfortunately there wasn't a box to tick for that so I ticked Christian.

ninfan - Member

Q.20 What is your religion?

Yes, it really could be much clearer, couldn't it, very ambiguous?

Exactly the opposite, it's a leading question. Not "are you religious" or "Do you practice a religion" but "What is your religion".

The ONS accept this- they defend the question as it's been used for some time, and so it's useful for measuring trends, even though it's poor for measuring absolutes. If they change the question, they'd get a truer answer but they'd lose the trend measurement. So they accept that the question gives misleading information on religiousity. It's not a conspiracy or anything.

Don't think this has an impact? Asking the question "What is your religion" gets 61% of respondents to identify as religious, as per the census. But asking the question "are you religious" gets only 29% to respond yes.

Similiarly, if you ask the census question, then follow it with "Do you believe in Christ", only 48% of all the "Christians" do. And just over half believe in God. That's a bit tricky really.

Relax, Easter is over. The unnecessary chocolate has been eaten and the altar of consumerism can be worshipped yet again.

Chocolate is never unnecessary.

Thinking religion is risible doesn't mean having to find an alternative altar to worship at, silly. Altars are all part of the risibility.

Relax, Easter is over. The unnecessary chocolate has been eaten and the altar of consumerism can be worshipped yet again.

You seem to think that the opposite of religion is rampant consumerism. This is not the case.

Sorry I should have added Simon Cowell and reality TV.

Yumyum. The head first...

[img] [/img]

Sorry I should have added Simon Cowell and reality TV.

Not really.