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

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.

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.

Do you have a link ?
I want to send it to someone

TA

What did Jesus say before he died on the cross?

No-one touch my £$%&ing Easter Eggs, I'll be back on Monday.

"Immaculate Confection"

Edit: too slow 🙁

@JY- stuff here.
https://humanism.org.uk/campaigns/religion-and-belief-some-surveys-and-statistics/

Much Obliged sir

Does it really matter? Seriously other than people who should know better getting upset because David Cameron said something which might be nothing more than strictly factually accurate does it change anything?

Would "Britain is a multi faith country which accepts your right to believe our disbelieve (an act of faith in its self since disbelief has zero basis in fact , otherwise it would be disprove) what you like, but asks that by and large you observe the Christian traditions of this country and follow the moral code into which you in the UK are educated (which is coincidentally based on the Christian and therfore Jewish belief structure, since predominantly all education in this country stemmed from the church at some point, but is in no way exclusive of your non christian belief), and asks that you largely accept public holidays based on christian festivals and that you consider working Sundays to be something requiring extra pay and or reduced hours since its the Christian holy day, but in no way requires that you go to church, and we accept Jesus wouldn't recognise the church today anyhow since it didn't exist until several centuries after he died and he was Jewish after all." be any better?

Does it really matter?

Yes

Yes. Because if this is a christian country, then it becomes arguable that laws, education, social and cultural policy should reflect that. Since we're not, then it's not. And when it's the Prime Minister asserting that we're a christian country, that's cause for concern. Maybe it's just empty noisemaking, maybe not, but there are plenty of people who do think along these lines and we could do without encouraging them.

I'm not religious at all but I can still see why it's not too nice as a muslim or a sikh or a pastafarian to be told that "this is a christian country not a noodly country". Truth is we are not a religious country full stop, so let's acknowledge the level playing field, whether christian or any other religion, you're a respected minority among minorities. Nothing good can come of misrepresenting that, and plenty of bad.

[quote=Northwind ]if this is a christian country, then it becomes arguable that laws, education, social and cultural policy should reflect that

Though as pointed out above, laws etc. do reflect that.

It seems to me we have two options
1. The state becomes totally secular and we abandon all Christian festivals and holidays
2. We become multi cultural/religious and embrace all festivals and holidays.

In the interests of maximising time on the bike, I would propose we throw our combined weight behind option 2.

Northwind » if this is a christian country, then it becomes arguable that laws, education, social and cultural policy should reflect that

Though as pointed out above, laws etc. do reflect that.

Just off the top of my head:
Sunday trading
Equal marriage
Divorce
Abortion legality/limits

The fact some laws aren't doesn't mean that laws in general don't reflect.

most of the "laws" reflect social norms that predate Christianity in this country . Of the Specific old testament ten commandment's only don't kill and don't nick and don't do perjury feature in our law .Of the few thousand laws scattered through the bible most are about clothing choice, diet, owning slaves and some pretty appalling treatment for rape victims . None of which thankfully feature in "our" laws. Our laws do not reflect Christianity but some pan cultural norms essential to living in stable settled communities.

Truth is we are not a religious country full stop, so let's acknowledge the level playing field, whether christian or any other religion, you're a respected minority among minorities. Nothing good can come of misrepresenting that, and plenty of bad.

I agree with not misrepresenting. So let's start with the truth - we are a religious country with an established church. We also are very tolerant and respectful of other religions indeed we have laws that protect that. All in all, a pretty good place to live. Plenty of bad from trying to pretend otherwise.

[i]we[/i] are a religious country

Speak for yourself.

Edit: Oh. Perhaps you were?

We have an established church yes, but that's merely a historic fact. It doesn't make the country as a whole Christian. Given that Sunday services apparently attract about 1M attendees and a very small percentage of the population actually attend church or believe in God or Jesus as the son of God, I find it difficult to agree that this is a "religious country".

No Woppit....it's fact. Good, bad, indifferent according to your view, but fact nonetheless. It's even on google.

It's when people make stupid sweeping statements like 'we are a religious country' that it becomes annoying. Hardly anyone I know is religious, and very few adults as a percentage of the population actively take part in anything religious.

The idea that the religious have a monopoly on altruism, morality and anti-consumerism is a false and harmful one.

No Woppit....it's fact. Good, bad, indifferent according to your view, but fact nonetheless. It's even on google.

Depends how you define 'religious' - we've already established why the census isn't a worthwhile source of evidence. If we're so religious why don't more people go to church?

'we are a religious country' that it becomes annoying. Hardly anyone I know is religious, and very few adults as a percentage of the population actively take part in anything religious.

Yet 75% of the population identify themselves as having a religion, go figure!

If we're so religious why don't more people go to church?

Isn't faith based on belief, rather than going to a particular building regularly, after all, God, if he exists, is everywhere 😉

we've already established why the census isn't a worthwhile source of evidence.

In a poll conducted by YouGov in March 2011 on behalf of the BHA, when asked the census question ‘What is your religion?’, 61% of people in England and Wales ticked a religious box (53.48% Christian and 7.22% other) while 39% ticked ‘No religion’.

When the same sample was asked the follow-up question ‘Are you religious?’, only 29% of the same people said ‘Yes’ while 65% said ‘No’, meaning over half of those whom the census would count as having a religion said they were not religious.

Less than half (48%) of those who ticked ‘Christian’ said they believed that Jesus Christ was a real person who died and came back to life and was the son of God.

Asked when they had last attended a place of worship for religious reasons, most people in England and Wales (63%) had not attended in the past year, 43% of people last attended over a year ago and 20% of people had never attended. Only 9% of people had attended a place of worship within the last week.

Isn't faith based on belief, rather than going to a particular building regularly, after all, God, if he exists, is everywhere

Yes, and most people don't believe in god. Ergo, most people are not religious.

most people don't believe in god

You could ask 'do you believe in god?' and only get a 30% yes answer -

at the same time I reckon that if you asked 'Does god exist?

Yes,
No,
Maybe

I'd be willing to bet my house that you didn't get anywhere near the 70% remainder coming up with a definitive No!

I would love to know how the brain functions in the 65% who say they are not religious having previously stated they are Christian.

I would love to know how the brain functions in the 65% who say they are not religious having previously stated they are Christian.

You're making it sound more complicated than it is. Some people claim they are Christian, when asked "are you religious" which they take as meaning do you go to church regularly, do you pray every day, etc, they answer "no". A fairly simple concept to understand imo, even if you don't necessarily agree with it.

In typical fashion, I have just read the posts above on this page, rather than any of the preceding pages, which clearly gives me every reason to suggest that a belief in whatever one defines as god, need not have anything to do with a or any doctrine.

I would love to know how the brain functions in the 65% who say they are not religious having previously stated they are Christian.

You could read the rest of the thread, where it's been explained several times over?

a belief in whatever one defines as god, need not have anything to do with a or any doctrine.

Offhand, I don't think anyone's suggested otherwise. Though I'm not immediately seeing where you're going with that? Do you mean that the answer to "what is your religion?" could be "none / other" if one believes in a higher power but doesn't subscribe to an organised religion? Makes sense but I'd speculate that that situation would be about as statistically relevant as "Jedi."

But there again, maybe it is pretty common. If pressed, how many people would say "well, I don't know for sure, but I feel there might be 'something' up there"...? Hm.

Oh has this turned into a religion thread? I'd better read back.

Save yourself the trouble Molgrips....

You could read the rest of the thread, where it's been explained several times over?

Do many people read religious threads in their entirety ?

Obviously I would expect the usual religious debaters to do so, but for most people it's always the same argument but with a different thread title. I would have thought.

I would love to know how the brain functions in the 65% who say they are not religious having previously stated they are Christian.

According to [url= http://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/files/files/Post%20Religious%20Britain%20pdf.pdf ]this Theos report[/url], 11% of atheists identify themselves as Christians. 5% of atheists believe god is a "universal life force".

🙂

Yeah, it wasn't very good, was it?

This is a post-Christian country, that's all there is to it.

ernie_lynch - Member

You're making it sound more complicated than it is. Some people claim they are Christian, when asked "are you religious" which they take as meaning do you go to church regularly, do you pray every day, etc, they answer "no".

OK, make it more complicated, how about the "christians" who don't believe in christ? They're a bit like all the cyclists in here who never ride bikes I suppose.

Yeah, it wasn't very good, was it?

It did have a gem somewhere when someone said "we are a religious country".

OK, make it more complicated, how about the "christians" who don't believe in christ? They're a bit like all the cyclists in here who never ride bikes I suppose.

Is there a poll which identifies Christians who don't believe in Christ ?

As far as the cyclists on here who never ride bikes is concerned how would you know ?

In the last 7 days due to plenty of spare time I've been on an organised ride (either club or with mates) everyday bar Sunday - when it was pissing down, I even bumped into a regular from here at Leith Hill yesterday, but I generally don't like talking about cycling as I consider it to be a deeply personal and spiritual experience.

[img] [/img]

[url= http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/briefing-britain-a-christian-country/ ]Some more statistics[/url]

It would appear the majority of younger voters do believe in god of some form - probably simon cowell.

The irony of this debate is that the atheists are saying it is divisive, yet representatives from many other religions who reside here have been entirely comfortable with the speech, agree with the fact the UK is a Christian country and are entirely comfortable with that the fact.

The irony of this debate is that the atheists are saying it is divisive, yet representatives from many other religions who reside here have been entirely comfortable with the speech, agree with the fact the UK is a Christian country and are entirely comfortable with that the fact.

Religious organisations/people tend to 'side' with other religious people, rather than people with no religion. IIRC, at least one of the signatories of the letter sent by the National Secular society was a religious leader.

This sums it up for me: http://www.secularism.org.uk/blog/2014/04/the-debate-over-david-camerons-call-to-christianity-has-taken-a-wrong-turn

It is unfortunate that the debate has turned into "Is Britain a Christian country?" because it opened the doors for those Christians who don't understand secularism (or who prefer to misrepresent it) to turn the whole thing into an attack on their personal faith.
[b]The question we really need to ask is "Would Britain be a safer and fairer place if it had a secular constitution?"[/b]

EDIT: these threads always get depressing.

Not sure what that has to do with anything. I'd like to think a country is more than just its constitution.

EDIT: and if these secularistas think society can be reduced to mere documents then that tells you a lot about the narrowness of their view of the world. Glad I'm not one.

Secularism doesn't say anything about a view of the world, other than thinking church and state should be separate.

From [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism ]Wikipedia[/url]:

Secularism is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries.

You can be a secularist [i]and[/i] religious.

Edit: the sentence before the one you quoted included the phrase "Christians who don't understand secularism" 🙂

mefty - Member

The irony of this debate is that the atheists are saying it is divisive, yet representatives from many other religions who reside here have been entirely comfortable with the speech,

1) The question of divisiveness isn't just about the religious, it's about the irreligious too.
2) Just because "representatives" say it is so, doesn't mean it is so for all.

Edit: the sentence before the one you quoted included the phrase "Christians who don't understand secularism"

There's precious little I *do* understand, now you've just knocked another one off the list 🙁

Nice example from [url= http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2014/apr/07/eric-pickles-britain-christian-nation-athiest ]Giles Fraser[/url]:

Christianity was, among other things, an exposure of the violence of the Roman state towards those who did not share its values. That is what the cross is all about. Christianity went bad when it became appropriated by the Roman empire and the cross went from being a symbol of political oppression to a religious form of state triumphalism. Which is why all Christians should be extremely queasy about any cheap talk of us or anyone else being a "Christian nation".

the cross went from being a symbol of political oppression to a religious form of state triumphalism.

Er yeah it didn't really stay like that though did it?

the cross went from being a symbol of political oppression to a religious form of state triumphalism.

Er yeah it didn't really stay like that though did it?

Giles thinks it still is:

only when Christianity has come out of the shadow of Constantine's conversion of the Roman empire to Christianity – thus creating the dangerous idea of a Christian nation – can we return to recognising its essential force: that God is to be discovered alongside the victim, no matter what colour, class or creed.

Certainly, the Roman empire did some damage as a Christian 'nation'. 1500-or-so years after Christ's death one lot of Christians were burning another lot to keep this nation the correct sort of Christian nation, to the extent that a few years later a bunch of persecuted religious minorities fled to the colonies and (eventually) founded a secular state. At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, Hitler referred to Germany as a Christian nation in Mein Kampfe.

Which is why all Christians should be extremely queasy about any cheap talk of us or anyone else being a "Christian nation".

I figured it out guys... We've established that if you take the census figures, then discount the 52% that actually don't believe in christ, then we end up with a figure in the low-mid 30s for christian belief, right?

What else does a mid-30% share get you? A general election! So it's only natural that the man who's been ruling the country as if he won with an avalanche, would look at the christian share and think "30% eh? That puts you in charge. We are a decisively Tory, Christian country".

I wonder what other groups command a magic 30% majority.

Given that Sunday services apparently attract about 1M attendees

I'm genuinely amazed it's that high! I'd have guessed at maybe 250k....

Us UKIP supporters are all Christians and he's trying to win us back to the fold, but since we're all racists, oh and secretly total homophobes who will never forgive him for the Gay Marriage deal, he's totally screwed, did you all like our nice new posters?

Given that Sunday services apparently attract about 1M attendees

I'm genuinely amazed it's that high! I'd have guessed at maybe 250k....

1 million is the CofE stat for average weekly attendance, but there're not amazingly reliable figures with some double counting going on. For example, if a church has one service a month and 20 people attend, that's counted as an average weekly attendance of 20 and ignores the fact those 20 people will possibly be attending a different one service per month church on the other weeks. (Based on [url= http://davidkeen.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/latest-church-of-england-attendance.html ]what I've read on a friend's blog.[/url])

(And of course, any double counting will probably be more than made up for by attendance at non-CofE churches.)

1 million is only around 1.5% of the population, of course.

[quote=Cougar ]You could read the rest of the thread, where it's been explained several times over?

That's against my religion.

[quote=Northwind ]I wonder what other groups command a magic 30% majority.

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/02/07/scottish-independence-yes-34-no-52/

Result!

My very uniformed yet very basic observed perception is - ( possibly )

It appears some values in religon can be very positive, which maybe what Mr Cameron was portraying and maybe can be applied laterally and collectively across a variety of religions for the good of humanity.

However as a bystander who observes, sometimes I hardly feel compelled to get involved when it can simply appear often to be a set of rules which vary - within the same religon and within different religons creating mass conflict and war. No compromise - it's written and therefore it's true and absolute - although this seems to then vary even within the same groups yet alone different groups. Very confusing for my poor uniformed little brain.

If people have a belief and it makes them a good person ( which I guess is subjective) then why not?

The irony of this debate is that the atheists are saying it is divisive, yet representatives from many other religions who reside here have been entirely comfortable with the speech, agree with the fact the UK is a Christian country and are entirely comfortable with that the fact.

If people have a belief and it makes them a good person ( which I guess is subjective) then why not?

Absolutely. This is the position of the National Secular Society.

miketually - Member

1 million is the CofE stat for average weekly attendance, but there're not amazingly reliable figures

Funnily enough, I was talking to our chaplain about this a while back. It's officially a church of scotland ministry but hosts nonreligious events as well as muslim, catholic and mixed-religion services and prayer. Officially everyone that attends any of their events is a "church attendee" and so goes into the Church of Scotland stats. I went to one of their barbeques once and became a church attendee 😆

Right wing press pulling into line behind Cameron's latest cynical ploy...

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10781259/Attorney-General-Rise-of-fundamentalism-is-damaging-Christianity.html ]Ah, bless[/url]

If one person attends three services at the same church on the same day, that counts as three people.

Right wing press pulling into line behind Cameron's latest cynical ploy...

In his [url= http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/columnists/petermullen/11162596.Christian__What_does_that_mean_/ ]column for my local paper (it gets printed in several others too, I believe) The Rev Peter Mullen points out that what Cameron described isn't actually what being a Christian is about[/url]:

Here are some fundamental beliefs shared by all evangelicals: they all believe that good works are not enough, because we are all sinners and we are justified only by Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross. Moreover, this is not gentle Jesus, the Labour member for Galilee South. This is, according to evangelical Christians, Christ who was born of a virgin and rose from the dead.

Evangelicals also believe in the Ten Commandments and that marriage is exclusively a relationship between a man and a woman.

Mr Cameron, by his words and actions, has made it perfectly clear that he doesn’t believe those things. He is like so many thoroughly decent human beings who believe in doing their best, being generally kind and helpful.

This is admirable. But it is not Christianity.

If one person attends three services at the same church on the same day, that counts as three people.

You've discovered the mystery of the Holy Trinity ?

He is like so many thoroughly decent human beings who believe in doing their best, being generally kind and helpful.

This is admirable.

😯 😆 🙄

Yeah, screwing over the poor and vulnerable and helping out the rich and powerful - admirable.

From this link - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10781259/Attorney-General-Rise-of-fundamentalism-is-damaging-Christianity.html

“What is clear to me is that Christian values have formed our nation and are fundamental to who we are and how we are.

“There is a sense in which those things have disappeared into what we regard as our own values in a broader sense but they owe themselves to our Christian heritage and beliefs.

Over-egging it quite a bit but broadly reasonable I suppose. But then...

“To reconnect values to the beliefs that gave rise to them, I think is extremely important,

Why?

Also, WTF does the Attorney General think he should be voicing his personal opinions about religion in a newspaper?

Also, WTF does the Attorney General think he should be voicing his personal opinions about religion in a newspaper?

Presumably, you missed:

Right wing press pulling into line behind Cameron's latest cynical ploy...

Yeah, screwing over the poor and vulnerable and helping out the rich and powerful - admirable.

🙂

Even if Britain was a Christian country (it isn't); even if "Christian values" were distinct from the moral values of humans worldwide (they're not); even if promoting religious doctrine improved moral behaviour in modern society (it doesn't); even if all these were the case, the fact that this rhetoric is being spouted by Mr Cameron would surely make the socialist, leper-lover iconoclast, Jesus Christ, roll in his grave (had he not so famously vacated it).

- [url= ]Tim Minchin[/url]

Also, WTF does the Attorney General think he should be voicing his personal opinions about religion in a newspaper?

Newspapers make a profit by providing pages full of print which the purchaser then reads. Often this will involve reading about other people's opinions. HTH

[quote=miketually ]In his column for my local paper (it gets printed in several others too, I believe) The Rev Peter Mullen points out that what Cameron described isn't actually what being a Christian is about:

Well strictly speaking he appears to be pointing out that it's not [b]Evangelical[/b] Christianity, but then gets confused and forgets to add the "Evangelical" bit.

Newspapers make a profit by providing pages full of print which the purchaser then reads. Often this will involve reading about other people's opinions. HTH

My point is, which I'm sure you are aware of despite your facetious response - the Attorney General should be staying neutral on matters like this. Revealing his prejudices in a national newspaper is not appropriate.

Nice straw man argument here too:

Mr Grieve said: “As I go around and look at the way we make laws, and indeed many of the underlying ethics of society are Christian based and the result of 1500 years of Christian input into our national life. It is not going to disappear overnight. They [the atheists] are deluding themselves.”

Thing is, there's lots of handwaving about "christian values" etc, but religion is about belief and faith. If you strip that away, it's just not a religion any more.

So in trying argue that the UK is christian because of its christian history and "christian values" despite its lack of belief, what they're really doing is undermining the importance of faith to their religion. In order to make it look bigger than it is, they've diluted it to the point of meaninglessness, where you can be christian without actually believing in it.

I think if I was religious, I'd be annoyed at that, it seems basically disrespectful to those of true faith

My point is, which I'm sure you are aware of despite your facetious response - the Attorney General should be staying neutral on matters like this. Revealing his prejudices in a national newspaper is not appropriate.

Yeah I know exactly what your point was.......you'd be a lot happier if the Attorney General expressed opinions which you agreed with when he gives interviews to the Daily Telegraph.