UK Atheists Hope to Eliminate Jedi Population

antipunt

New member
Jan 3, 2009
3,035
0
0
In 2001, nearly 400,000 people wrote "Jedi" as their religion
Wat?

On topic, I understand what they're trying to do but it's still gonna sound bad on paper.
 

Paksenarrion

New member
Mar 13, 2009
2,911
0
0
Not G. Ivingname said:
As a Roman Catholic, I am inclined to say the following whenever I see this picture:

What is thy bidding, my Master?

Also, I usually write in "Sith" for my religion.

Also, if more people wrote Jedi or Sith, the government just might finance Force-based schools, where children all wear robes of tan or charcoal black, and are taught to fight each other whenever there is an encounter.
 

Acting like a FOOL

New member
Jun 7, 2010
253
0
0
similar.squirrel said:
They're right. Taking the piss is funny up to a point, but botching an attempt at furthering secularization is taking it a bit far.
You will not be able to excise the cancer of religion by laughing at it, that's for sure.
PREACH IT! PREACH IT!

you speak the truth! the New Atheist movement shall overtake the world!

all the superstitious will be extinguished!!! (sarcasm)
 
Aug 1, 2010
2,768
0
0
God I hate it when MY side does something really stupid. I'm a pretty hardcore Atheist, and even [i/]I[/i] would mark Jedi.

On a side note, my Captcha is Artificial Mishy
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
summerof2010 said:
More generally, just what are you talking about here?
People vote Jedi because they don't want to give their real religion away. Atheists vote atheist to stick it to God. Huge difference.
 

ArmorArmadillo

New member
Mar 31, 2010
231
0
0
No no no Jedi, you have to make a strong message that you're an independent freethinker by following our exact instructions rather than doing what you want!
 

Kwatsu

New member
Feb 21, 2007
198
0
0

"Individual question 20 asks: What is your religion?

This information reveals minority groups not identified by other census questions.

The statistics help in developing and monitoring policy aimed at assessing the needs of population groups whose experiences of public services and social interaction, for example employment and education, may be different to those in other groups. This information is used to plan services and target resources, and allows public authorities to assess and tackle discrimination and social exclusion associated with religion.

This information is also used by the NHS and local authorities to plan services for people from a wide range of religious backgrounds and to monitor their access to services, for example to inform policies on hospital chaplains or public literature and broadcasting.

This question has been asked twice before, once in 1851 and then 150 years later in 2001."


Wait.

If this is why they gather census data, and so many people in 2001 put Jedi, wouldn't our government then be under pressure to address the needs of said Jedi, maybe by building them a big honking temple in their local community? (You know, for Dark Lords of the Sith to smash up and stuff.)

I think I just gave myself an idea for a cheesy summer movie. :)
 

Choppaduel

New member
Mar 20, 2009
1,071
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
summerof2010 said:
More generally, just what are you talking about here?
People vote Jedi because they don't want to give their real religion away. Atheists vote atheist to stick it to God. Huge difference.
You mean stick it to people who believe in god, since there is no god.

:D

How could you stick it to that which does not exist?
 

Choppaduel

New member
Mar 20, 2009
1,071
0
0
Ultratwinkie said:
If there is no god, explain Chuck Norris. He came down from heaven to spread the word of the fist. :D
Chuck Norris does not exist, the idea of him is a figment of our collective conscience. Possibly generated because we, as a collective, want a tangible god.
 

RelexCryo

New member
Oct 21, 2008
1,414
0
0
ReiverCorrupter said:
mechanixis said:
RelexCryo said:
similar.squirrel said:
They're right. Taking the piss is funny up to a point, but botching an attempt at furthering secularization is taking it a bit far.
You will not be able to excise the cancer of religion by laughing at it, that's for sure.
The percentage of who is and who is not religous is not relevant to secularizing government. Even if 99% of the people are a certain religion, religious freedom would still mandate a secular government.
It's more complicated than that. In the United States, you literally have no hope running for office without being emphatically Christian. While there is a technical separation of church and state, in reality it's very much a Christian hegemony. By under-representing the actual non-religious demographic, we're just perpetuating a culture where someone's religion is seen as some kind of moral metric: being "Christian" automatically marks you as a good, intelligent person, while being Islamic or nonreligious demonizes you. It's a system of deeply ingrained prejudices.

RelexCryo said:
I think you meant to say "Botching an attempt at destroying religion."

A) Forcing them to put Atheist rather than Jedi is not going to further any attempt at destroying religion, it would not help in any size shape or form.
How is this "destroying religion"? There's no forcing here; it's just an appeal for them to take these things seriously. If anything, it's begging. You're buying in to the inflammatory tone of the article.

RelexCryo said:
B) Destroying religion is a violation of human rights. People have both a right to be free from being forced into other's religions, and to have whatever religion they wish.

C) Can you explain precisely why a lack of religion would make the world a better place? Chairman Mao of China, as I recall, did pretty much every horrible thing that religous people do. Same for Stalin. So it seems to me that the basic problems Atheists associate with religion are going to exist even without religion.
No one is talking about actively destroying religion! Atheists don't go out in the night and kidnap religious people to brainwash them! Religion is an extremely dominant force in government and culture, and 'militant' Atheists like this simply want to level the playing field by coaxing secularization along. As I said, religious fundamentalism has led to serious problems in the United States when it comes to elected officials. Gay marriage, anyone?
The people who are complaining about the Jedi aren't trying to destroy religion, they just want accurate census numbers because they don't want the UK to appear more religious than it is by having atheists sign up as Jedists.

But on the other hand, there are a lot of people who feel like the government has no business knowing their religion and sign Jedi because of this. And you know what? They're probably right. The census should just include a "prefer not to answer" option and the problem would probably be solved.

But you're wrong about militant atheists, some of them DO want to wipe out religion. Not all of them by any means, but some. They're nut-jobs and they give a bad name to the other atheists.
Read the original post. Similar Squirrel mentioned removing the cancer of religion. I was not talking about atheists in general, I was talking to him specifically.

similar.squirrel said:
They're right. Taking the piss is funny up to a point, but botching an attempt at furthering secularization is taking it a bit far.
You will not be able to excise the cancer of religion by laughing at it, that's for sure.
EDIT: I meant to reply to Mechanixis, sorry.
 

Faladorian

New member
May 3, 2010
635
0
0
Bobzer77 said:
It seems definitive, Atheists can't take a joke.

Jedi ftw.
It's not "atheists not being able to take a joke." Sure, it's kind of funny to put Jedi as your religion as a little joke, but you're still seriously fucking up the results of the poll. That's the part they care about.

Baresark said:
They are by far the most serious and annoying folks around whenever the topic comes up. I put them up there with the Jesus freaks who get in your face to save your soul. They are simply the other side of the isle, haha.

"NO, You MUST show me proof of GOD!"
"But you can't show me proof of not god?!?!"
"So, I don't need to!"

Haha, this should be turned into a web video series.
Those are militant atheists, and some of them are just as dumb as militant christians.

However, Atheists do not need to disprove God. Christians are the only ones claiming it exists, so they should bear the burden of proof.

If I told you invisible pixies follow everyone around, it wouldn't be your responsibility to waste your time proving me wrong. I would have to either prove myself correct, or discard my idea.


OT:They're right on the one hand about it just being fun and games, and I'm all for little practical jokes and what not, but if the state is trying to take a poll to gain information and advance knowledge, you're just making that harder for them. And if you make the collection of knowledge more difficult, there's less knowledge for you to absorb.
 

RelexCryo

New member
Oct 21, 2008
1,414
0
0
mechanixis said:
RelexCryo said:
similar.squirrel said:
They're right. Taking the piss is funny up to a point, but botching an attempt at furthering secularization is taking it a bit far.
You will not be able to excise the cancer of religion by laughing at it, that's for sure.
The percentage of who is and who is not religous is not relevant to secularizing government. Even if 99% of the people are a certain religion, religious freedom would still mandate a secular government.
It's more complicated than that. In the United States, you literally have no hope running for office without being emphatically Christian. While there is a technical separation of church and state, in reality it's very much a Christian hegemony. By under-representing the actual non-religious demographic, we're just perpetuating a culture where someone's religion is seen as some kind of moral metric: being "Christian" automatically marks you as a good, intelligent person, while being Islamic or nonreligious demonizes you. It's a system of deeply ingrained prejudices.

RelexCryo said:
I think you meant to say "Botching an attempt at destroying religion."

A) Forcing them to put Atheist rather than Jedi is not going to further any attempt at destroying religion, it would not help in any size shape or form.
How is this "destroying religion"? There's no forcing here; it's just an appeal for them to take these things seriously. If anything, it's begging. You're buying in to the inflammatory tone of the article.

RelexCryo said:
B) Destroying religion is a violation of human rights. People have both a right to be free from being forced into other's religions, and to have whatever religion they wish.

C) Can you explain precisely why a lack of religion would make the world a better place? Chairman Mao of China, as I recall, did pretty much every horrible thing that religous people do. Same for Stalin. So it seems to me that the basic problems Atheists associate with religion are going to exist even without religion.
No one is talking about actively destroying religion! Atheists don't go out in the night and kidnap religious people to brainwash them! Religion is an extremely dominant force in government and culture, and 'militant' Atheists like this simply want to level the playing field by coaxing secularization along. As I said, religious fundamentalism has led to serious problems in the United States when it comes to elected officials. Gay marriage, anyone?
Read the original post. Similar Squirrel mentioned removing the cancer of religion. I was not talking about atheists in general, I was talking to him specifically.

similar.squirrel said:
They're right. Taking the piss is funny up to a point, but botching an attempt at furthering secularization is taking it a bit far.
You will not be able to excise the cancer of religion by laughing at it, that's for sure.
 

Logic 0

New member
Aug 28, 2009
1,676
0
0
It's good to know that britain is full of sith, better not bring my lightsaber while traveling.