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

I dont wear a religious beard, hat, etc. Christianity is more subtle. He lives in you heart OP.

The UK is by virtue of the fact that it's a by default religion, as you said at school it's part of the day. There was a very long thread about it a week or so ago when he kicked off with his easter message.

It results in people ticking the box christian on the census which makes the stats work, people go with the flow of having a religion based on what they were brought up with. Very few make it to ticking atheist, if the question was about being a practicing x,y or z or none of the above the numbers would be significantly lower.

B&Q was shut yesterday. That's all the proof I need.

I get that not all Christians wear a badge and I suppose statistics support his comments to some to some extent, but religion is such a contentious subject labelling our country 'Christian' is going to erk someone. I'm not sure that in this day and age politicians should be making such sweeping generalisations. I'm one of the 25% who happily ticks the 'no religion' box but I'm also British... As I said I'm not that bothered but I feel a little uncomfortable when politics and religion are mixed together.

Most people start off as religious due to indoctrination as a child by parents, school, church, etc. By the time they're teenagers or young adults they're most likely agnostic and leave it at that. It's only a minority that make the next step to becoming atheist. So we're probably an Agnostic country - certainly not a Christian country.

Is it cool to rebel though? As a society/youth.

Christian as a practising religion? No. Christian as in the principles of the faith? Certainly not, and even more so in Cameron's case!

Not by a Christian poet but a beautiful poem non the less:
I tried to find Him on the Christian cross, but He
was not there; I went to the Temple of the
Hindus and to the old pagodas, but I could not
find a trace of Him anywhere.

I searched on the mountains and in the valleys
but neither in the heights nor in the depths was I
able to find Him. I went to the Ka'bah in Mecca,
but He was not there either.

I questioned the scholars and philosophers but
He was beyond their understanding.

I then looked into my heart and it was there
where He dwelled that I saw Him; He was
nowhere else to be found.

maybe it's not rebeling hora but finding some free will and realising that it's not for you.

People get to make a decision consciously or unconsciously but few get past the agnostic but don't know it stage.

Not sure how that poem is beautiful. It seems to be saying that all other religions are wrong and science is wrong. Our way is the only way. Doesn't look good for God's claimed omnipresence either. Each to their own, though.

I dunno, I've never thought of myself as a Christian. I don't believe in god but I admire those who have a faith.

I still seem happy enough to celebrate Christmas, though!

It doesn't even rhyme!

Oh yeah Britain's really Christian. It's one of the most materialistic, capitalist cultures in the world.

JCL just following the lead of the lot in the Vatican, the original multi national 🙂

That Poem reminds me of the film [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigmata_(film) ]'Stigmata'[/url], epic film and presents religion in a way that I found interesting. The idea that belief is from within and that's where you'll find god, not in churches etc...

Must dig that out again. I might not believe but that's one hell of a movie. Thanks Hora 😀

Off for a ride, catch up with this later.

I still seem happy enough to celebrate Christmas, though!

Christmas isn't really a Christian festival - it's the pagan midwinter festival that the Christians just hijacked and renamed. All the fun parts of Christmas - Feasting, presents, decorations, singing predate the boring Christian stuff. Same with Easter - it's the pagan Spring festival celebrating new life - hence Easter bunnies, eggs, chicks, etc.

So you're really celebrating pagan festivals not Christian ones.

Hmmmm. Alice says Cameron is wrong. [url= http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bristol-broadcaster-Alice-Roberts-challenges-PM-s/story-20986426-detail/story.html ]Alice in the post[/url]

The original statement is probably based on census data. It seems to me that when people in the UK aren't religious they tend to say they're CofE.

So Cameron is probably saying Britain doesn't care about religion in the main.....

And the comments above about Pagan crossover aren't entirely true. The Christians didn't steal the festivals, they just chose to celebrate the life and death of a key figure using the same dates to avoid confusion.

You're born. You live a good life. You die. Done.

Not by a Christian poet but a beautiful poem non the less:

There once was a bloke called Jesus
Actually, there wasn't.

B&Q was shut yesterday. That's all the proof I need.

Tell me about it. Thankfully, in repentance, they opened at 7am this morning.

JCL just following the lead of the lot in the Vatican, the original multi national

Yeah good point.

There once was a bloke called Jesus
Actually, there wasn't.

There probably was. He probably said some of the things attributed to him. He was probably even crucified.

But he wasn't the son of God, didn't perform any miracles, wasn't resurrected, and didn't ascend into heaven.

... but I admire those who have a faith.

B&Q was shut yesterday. That's all the proof I need

Not in Scotland it wasn't 😉

he said he felt the “healing power” of faith in his own life.

He is correct.

What ever Cameroon says has almost no relevance to most people, all he's attempting to do is win back some of the current UKIP supporters in time for the local and MEP elections in May. If that works expect a lot more reference to religiosity in the lead up to the general election next year, oh, and some insane tax cuts.

He is correct.

He is correct in the narrow constitutional sense that we continue to have an established Church.

In terms of the beliefs of the majority of the population, he is incorrect.

There's nothing Christian in Christianity. Look at the years of rule by fear and manipulation of the weak and poor. The same goes for today, it is just more subtle than in the Middle Ages or during the Inquisition. All religion breeds is intolerance and hatred of others that have different way of interpreting the same books. For that reason i'm out. Too many people have died because some coward in a cape has decreed that their views are not worthy.
So perhaps we as a Country, are 'Christian'? Although I like to think that we have one of the most tolerant societies around. Although idiots in UKIP, BNP, EDL and the Conservatives would willingly plunge us back in to the white, British supremacist days at the click of ones fingers.
On that note, I'm heading out on t'old mountain cycle.

There's nothing Christian in [b]Christian[/b]ity

FTFY plus a lot of non-white Christians including Archbishops in this country and elsewhere.

Enjoy the ride.

It seems to me that when people in the UK aren't religious they tend to say they're CofE.

Perhaps they used to, not sure if thats still true. It used to be the polite answer

Theres a difference between religion and faith and you can be part of one and not have the other. Its far too nebulous a question to be able to have everyone answer the question by ticking yes or no. And over different decades when the census is taken the questions and answers have different meanings. There are times and places where you could ask the question where people would describe themselves as Christian regardless of whether they actively practice any kind of religious observance. Currently though atheism is quite fashionable, or rather expressing atheism is, so people are more likely define themselves as positively atheist rather than passively part of a christian tradition.

But where religion has a different context the answer to the question might be different. In the west of scotland you might define yourself as catholic or protestant on the basis of which football team you support, even if you haven't stepped inside a church for all your adult life, and obviously in NI your political position is mixed up with religious identity, and in that instance you may well feel that both your religion and your politics are something you've been born into rather than chosen or objectively assessed.

The US is quite interesting in this respect, statistically a very christian country, but genetically and socially not very different to us. In the US church-going is very much the social norm, and its the norm whether you have any firmly held belief or not. During his election campaign Obama was hit with one of those 'When did you stop beating your wife' questions and it was to do with the pastor of the church he attended and some quite radical views they held. The reality was Obama would have had no idea what views the pastor held as he wasn't actually going to church. He'd done what a lot of people do - say (when asked) that he attends a church that has a huge congregation - so big that way nobody notices that your not actually there. And you say/do that out politeness, its more polite to lie about your religious commitments than to say you don't have any.

In terms of the beliefs of the majority of the population, he is incorrect.

'Beliefs' in what sense? Our moral, legal, family and social codes are all quite christian even if very few of us acquired those codes through studying the bible. Our national identity is tied to those codes, and those codes are part of a christian tradition.

'Beliefs' in what sense? Our moral, legal, family and social codes are all quite christian even if very few of us acquired those codes through studying the bible.

As I understand it, to be a Christian you need to believe that Jesus Christ is the resurrected son of an all powerful personal God, who died for our sins such that we can have eternal life. In that sense.

The basis of our society, morals, etc. are both, pre-Christian, Christian, and post-Christian. Most 'Christian' beliefs and morals pre-date Christianity.

I'm not into human sacrifice cults myself but Britian's religious infrastructure makes it a christian nation no doubt. The numbers seem to say Britain is a secular state though.

If our moral and legal codes are christian, why do so many Christians, including the church of england itself,discriminate against women and homosexuals?

Most 'Christian' beliefs and morals pre-date Christianity.

Indeed - but they're quite neatly collectively summarised as 'Christian'

Its true there are elements of Christian tradition that predate our adoption of Christianity, but modern druidic and pagan practises are far removed from any properly traditional national identity. They're a mixture of victorian and 1980s new age fantasies and not part of any continuation of a pre-christian way of life.

If our moral and legal codes are christian, why do so many Christians, including the church of england itself,discriminate against women and homosexuals?

Do you know how many christians discriminate on that basis? There may be an official position but it doesn't mean every single letter and word announced from the pulpit defines the thoughts and feelings of the congregation. They can actually think for themselves.

Do you know how many non christians discriminate against women and homosexuals?

Do you know whether these levels of discrimination are more or less common or overt amongst either group?

We cannot [i]not[/i] be a christian country under the present constitution which ties us to the church of england and the monarchy.
This is of course getting very out of touch with the electorate who over the last 150 years are assuredly less inclined to go to church, pray and have a personal relationship with JC.

I also understand that the leader of a country with the C of E so wrapped up in its constitution should be expected to make some press in the middle of Holy Week (after all its more important than christmas for proper christians, non?)

Sadly much of this this reeks of opportunism on Cameron's part. I would like to have heard Justin Welby comment more on this story (well perhaps he did but it wasn't soundbite-worthy enough. I would imagine that Welby's predecessor would have had something contentious to say along the lines of politicians cherry-picking the bits of [s]christianity[/s] Jesus' teachings that fit their agendas (humility, be thankful for what the lord hath given thee) and leaving out the bits that don't (unconditional love of thy neighbour or anyone else's neighbour, redistribution of riches, turn the other cheek etc).

[edit] re-read that and i sound like a right god-botherer! FWIW I am a well-read 'backslider' 😉 . Fond of the values, not so fond of the church.

Indeed - but they're quite neatly collectively summarised as 'Christian'

Or, human. They're human morals and behaviours which most religions hold in common.

Claiming them as Christian is divisive.

If only there was some form of survey, in which they went out and asked not just a representative sample, but actually asked everyone by giving them a form to fill in, perhaps once every ten years?

Then we could have a chance to see what religion people actually self identified as!

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-england-and-wales/rpt-religion.html

[i]In the 2011 Census, Christianity was the largest religion, with 33.2 million people (59.3 per cent of the population). The second largest religious group were Muslims with 2.7 million people (4.8 per cent of the population).

14.1 million people, around a quarter of the population in England and Wales, reported they have no religion in 2011.

7.2 per cent of people did not answer the question.[/i]

So, a clear majority of the population identified themselves as being Christian, one has to wonder what more it would take to prove that we're still a christian country?

Obviously, we'll get the usuals on here telling them that these stupid people were wrong about their own belief in god and religion and that despite them actually saying they were christian, it was all conditioning and in reality they're not...

Obviously, we'll get the usuals on here telling them that these stupid people were wrong about their own belief in god and religion and that despite them actually saying they were christian, it was all conditioning and in reality they're not...

Just to prove you right:

Most people ticking the Christian box on the census do so because they were christened, not because they've accepted Jesus Christ as their saviour.

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

And the 390,000 people who reported themselves as Jedi, really are Jedi.

Or, human. They're human morals and behaviours which most religions hold in common.

Claiming them as Christian is divisive.

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.

Most people ticking the Christian box on the census do so because they were christened, not because they've accepted Jesus Christ as their saviour.

You're asking christians to be very black and white in their thinking.

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?