Do you wish the US Census included religion?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yes, just so I can say that I put down "Christian" on the census. I can see it now:

officepark/jmfcst/John Dibble or someone: You are not a Christian.
Me: Uh, I put down "Christian" on the Census.

Also I'm sure there are plenty of people raised Catholic who'd like it just so they can NOT put down Catholic.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I wouldn't answer religious or ethnic questions.....so I dont' care.  I forget which other one(s) I refused to answer right now.

[tpfkaw]

Initially was going to put "yes," until I saw your justification, which is so retarded that I voted "no."

[Хahar 🤔]

Yes. I like data.

[Hash]

Yes. I like data.

^^

Censuses which include stuff on religion, ethnicity, ancestry, race and so forth are the most useful for political demographers. Not France's useless crap census which doesn't include jack.

[Torie]

On these sorts of questions, I always wonder whether to put down Protestant (no, I won't pick a sect) or Atheist/Agnostic. I suspect that what the census really wants to know is whether or not I am a WASP, and I am. I just don't happen to believe in God much.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I doubt there'd be an atheist/agnostic section, most countries don't have one. There's simply an option for "None".

[angus]

Do you wish the US Census included religion?

I do not.  The census is already intrusive, and some consider it bothersome.  If the goal is full participation, then we need to keep superfluous and unnecessary questions to a minimum.

Hospitals and schools need the information because if you're dying they want to know whether they should call a priest.  The Army needs it as well, for practical reasons.  The US Census Bureau does not.

[RI]

Yes. I like data.

^^

Censuses which include stuff on religion, ethnicity, ancestry, race and so forth are the most useful for political demographers. Not France's useless crap census which doesn't include jack.

This.

[bgwah]

Yes times a million. It would be extremely fascinating.

[Lunar]

Absolutely, I would love to see the Muslim, Jewish, and Catholic maps for Brooklyn.

[Bacon King]

Your argument makes no sense, BRTD. I know a white person who put his race as "African American" on the census, does that make him black?

Not saying you aren't a Christian, but what you put on a government form doesn't determine your identity.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Yes... more data is always good.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

on the one hand it would be fascinating. on the other it could be very contentious as to how religious groups are categorized and would make people even more suspicious of the census.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The danger is intrusiveness; it has to be clear to people that all they're being asked is cultural identification as the census has no business asking specifically about belief.

[Torie]

The danger is intrusiveness; it has to be clear to people that all they're being asked is cultural identification as the census has no business asking specifically about belief.

So I answer Protestant, and therein lies the problem. It is confusing. And how about the quarter to third or so of Jews who don't really subscribe to any religion?  For them it is all cultural - not religious.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Will Mormon be a choice if Romney wins?

[courts]

No, absolutely not. The government is out of control as it is in this area. There shouldn't be questions on 'race' or how much I make or consumption habits or anything like that never mind some of the more pushy workers. It was never intended to be anything like it is now.

[angus]

Will Mormon be a choice if Romney wins?

On school and hospital forms it usually is.  There's Christian in bold, with indented subclasses in regular font:  protestant, catholic, mormon, other christian, then, in bold, other choices such as Muslim, Jew, Hindu, etc., other (specify), and none.  Mormons are very quick to point out that they’re not Protestants, and from what I know of their religion it seems reasonable to categorize them separately.

I'd imagine most mainline protestants choose protestant, while the american-style calvinists choose other and write stuff like Baptist or Pentecostal in the blank.  Probably Eastern Rite people mostly choose Catholic, although I’d imagine a few choose other and write in Bulgarian Orthodox or whatever.  If you wanted to discourage them from choosing Catholic you could put the word Roman before Catholic, but then that'd defeat the purpose of asking the question in the first place.  At least for hospitals and such.

The Dutch always kept amazingly good records on religious affiliation.  For centuries they had a list of everyone's religion along with his last known address and contact information.  It was very convenient for the Germans when they occupied the Netherlands starting in 1940 and wanted to start rounding up Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses, and other undesirables.  

The Flemmings may have had their own reasons.  But I still say that the US Census Bureau has no good reason to need such information.  And it would be a burden, making what some consider a bothersome task even more bothersome.  And it'll complicate matters.  Some folks like Torie will wonder whether it's asking about your religious beliefs or is it just asking you to specify religious identity for the purpose of obtaining information on the ethnoreligious identities of residents.  And also it'll be strange for folks from the Far East, for whom religious affiliations aren't mutually exclusive.  In a country like France, where most everyone is nominally monotheistic, you can subcategorize.  One cannot be a Catholic and a Protestant at the same time, or a Jew and a Muslim at the same time.  But our population is much more diverse, and some of the largest immigrant blocks are coming from societies where religious pluralism is the norm.  In China, a person might pray at a Dao temple one day, and at a Buddhist temple on another day, leave oranges out for a dead ancestor's spirit to eat on the third day, and still attend high mass at Saint Patrick's Cathedral on Sunday morning.  And not really feel the need to claim any of them formally and officially.

It's really just a mess to introduce such questions on the census form.  And, once again, I have seen no practical justification for introducing it.  Demographic curiosity doesn't cut it.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

angus, out of idle curiosity, do you answer all of the census questions?  Ftr, I don't.

[angus]

hehe.  Well, I'm better than my brother, the quintessential libertarian.  He has never filled out a census form in his life.  Just tosses them.  He's also never registered to vote, even though he's nearly 50 years old now.  And he absolutely refused to register for selective service.  We're both of the age during which it was required upon our 18th birthday.  I was keen on getting grants and other free monies for college and such, and selective service registration is a prerequisite.  And even though I wasted every penny of every pell grant I ever got on weed and booze, and generally have little to show for it, I'm glad to have received them.  (Well, I suppose some of it must have gone for books and tuition, but I went to a state school and generally lived cheap, so the lion's share went to fund my habits.)

No, I've tried to play ball.  I've always been something of a non-conformist, and had my share of trouble with the authorities over the years, but I'm pretty civic-minded.  I fill out the census, always vote, show up for jury duty, and even prepared to serve in my country's defense if called upon to do so.  

The census form I get is the short one.  Pretty straightforward.  Some of the school forms are a little more challenging.  For my son's race, there is no "mixed" as a choice.  I always choose "other" and write in mixed.  Iowa's weird.  Progressive Redneck, sort of.  Like, on the forms there's a place for Parent 1 and Parent 2.  I guess it used to say Father and Mother, but now you have the possibility for two fathers or two mothers.  So the state recognizes that and is sensitive to that.  But there's no "mixed" as a choice.  Iowa is one of the few states where you probably are more likely to see a same-sex couple than a mixed-race couple.  Progressive Redneck.  Also, the school does not ask for religious preference.  But the state medical forms do.  So for my son I check other and write in "unknown."  My wife used to write "none" but I asked her, "How do you know?"  She couldn't answer that.  Of course she couldn't, he's only six!  I've never taken him to see a priest or a rabbi or a guru or an imam, or tried to indoctrinate him in any way into any known religion, but I'd not forbid him from finding his own.  He may have a religious preference and just hasn't discovered it yet.  Maybe he'll come home one day and say Daddy I want to be a Muslim or Daddy I want to be a Mormon or whatever, but until then we don't know whether he has a religious preference, or what that preference is.  So I've taught her to put "unknown" for that.  

I can sort of see the school wanting that.  Let's say a student is hurt badly, so they call an ambulance.  Do they call a priest?  If he's Roman or Eastern Rite Catholic, they should.  Should the medics do a blood transfusion?  Well, some of those religions don't allow that, so they need to know.  And what if they're having ham sandwiches for lunch?  Do you feed a boy named Hamad Abdul Ben-Ali a ham sandwich?  Or do you give a girl named Gonesha Nahasapeemapetilon a roast beef sandwich?  Well, if it says she's Episcopalian on her registration form you're probably okay with that.  

I don't want to see that on the census form though.  There's absolutely no justifiable reason that I can think of for the government to have that information.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The danger is intrusiveness; it has to be clear to people that all they're being asked is cultural identification as the census has no business asking specifically about belief.

So you're saying people raised Catholic should put down Catholic even if they belong to a different church now? Because I can assure you most people of that type will NOT voluntarily identify as Catholic. There's plenty of other people with other churches this applies to of course.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The danger is intrusiveness; it has to be clear to people that all they're being asked is cultural identification as the census has no business asking specifically about belief.

So you're saying people raised Catholic should put down Catholic even if they belong to a different church now? Because I can assure you most people of that type will NOT voluntarily identify as Catholic. There's plenty of other people with other churches this applies to of course.

     They could ask two different questions: current belief & belief raised in, if different.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That's exactly the sort of thing Al said needs to be avoided.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The danger is intrusiveness; it has to be clear to people that all they're being asked is cultural identification as the census has no business asking specifically about belief.

So you're saying people raised Catholic should put down Catholic even if they belong to a different church now? Because I can assure you most people of that type will NOT voluntarily identify as Catholic. There's plenty of other people with other churches this applies to of course.

No, you should point down whatever religion you identify with (and either answer 'none' or leave the question blank if you don't identify with any). My point is that it is perfectly legitimate to ask about religious identity (which is essentially a question about culture) but asking about belief is intrusive and thus not acceptable. So long as that distinction is understood by most people, that's fine; there will always be problems though.