Slashdot Mirror


Australia Oppresses Jedi

eberry writes "Despite over 70,000 respondents (.37% of the population) replying "Jedi" to an optional faith question on Australia's census, it will not become a recognized religion According to CNN "Australian officials say respondents could face a $1,000 fine for supplying false information. Citing, and I quote, "...people of a particular religious affiliation do not provide the correct information, certain facilities might not be built that otherwise would be." Personally I find their lack of faith disturbing." And I find the fact that this is on CNN even more so ;)

51 of 685 comments (clear)

  1. Separation of Church and State by nuggz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is no reason the state needs to know my religion.
    They should not even ask for this information. It is irrelevant to any aspect of the governments purpose.
    My tax money shouldn't be used to provide any religious services to anyone.

    1. Re:Separation of Church and State by Doom+Ihl'+Varia · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem with some of these faith based programs (the ones where you are forced to live on-site) is they REQUIRE you to partake in religious activities more often then not. Say you are an athiest and you are alcoholic. Then let's say you got arrested for drunken & disorderly. The judge orders you to rehab. Wouldn't you be a little irked if a court inadvertently ordered you practice a religion you want no part of?

    2. Re:Separation of Church and State by JabberWokky · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Simple. There is a prohibition against endorsing a particular faith by the federal government (states can vary), but that does not mean that there is no such thing as religion. Acknowleding and even (in certain ways) supporting faith based charities, such as homeless shelters and free kitchens, is helping the people help themselves.

      Or are you saying that we should have a federally mandated atheistic state? That would worry me as much as dictating any particular religious faith. Religion is part of society, and society creates the government. It's chilling to think of it your way - a government that dictates the society.

      --
      Evan (no reference)

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    3. Re:Separation of Church and State by operagost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The first amendment says that Congress may make no law respecting an establishment of religion. This is an executive office, not legislative, and it doesn't establish a religion past acknowledging they exist and are a part of American communities. If anyone thinks that's not okay somehow, they can bring it up with the federal courts.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    4. Re:Separation of Church and State by Francis+Avila · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The problem with some of these faith based programs (the ones where you are forced to live on-site) is they REQUIRE you to partake in religious activities more often then not.

      Yes, but you don't have to listen. (Isn't that what everyone is always saying about the 1st Amendment? You have the right to speak, but I have the right to ignore?) And if it solves this following problem...

      Then let's say you got arrested for drunken & disorderly.

      ...then what does it matter? I thought we were supposed to fund organizations based on how effective they are. If an organization is very good at, say, alcoholic rehab, why should it be denied funding because it also happens to be faith-based? The state isn't funding a religion, it's funding a charitable organization. How is this any different from the state funding scientific research? Or art? Or hospitals? Or street-cleaners? Or even granting scholarships to people who hold a given religious belief, or any kind of belief? He/she/it does what it does well, and so they receive money so they can do it better and so that the gov't knows it isn't wasting its money. Don't corporate investors do the same thing (dot-com frenzy aside)? Who cares about anything else?

      (Of course, many argue somewhat plausibly that the constitution says nothing about denying government support even to religions, just that it would guarantee religious freedom, in contrast to what was happening in England at that time and before. But I'm not here to argue that.)

      If one who is an atheist (to use your example) is bothered by being in a "faith-based" organization, perhaps that person's own faith in atheism (contradiction?) is weak. He should be able to remain firm without trouble, I would think, as many others have in the past, even to the point of being killed over it. (Ancient Rome, anyone? Modern China, anyone?)

      Remember also that many hospitals are religiously-affiliated. In times past, especially in Catholic hospitals, a very large percentage of the staff would actually be comprised of priests and nuns. I don't think anyone was ever shocked and horrified by that, so why should this small-time stuff bother you now?

      I say this: if the gov't is to be involved in maintaining quality of life in any capacity, it should act like a corporate investor, funding charitable organizations ("companies") that give a good return on investment, not ones that are cash sinkholes and don't benefit anyone. Who should care about ideology if the job gets done?

      The only other possibilities I see are (A) the gov't doesn't concern itself with quality of life at all (unreasonable), (B) the gov't funds everybody regardless (a huge waste of money), (C) the gov't does everything itself (bloat and corruption) or (D) the gov't only funds "ideologically pure" organizations.

      Of course, since it's impossible for an organization to be ideologically pure (everyone has an ideology), "purity" becomes defined simply on the basis of whatever the regime in power says it is, which sounds to me like a much more tyrannical and arbitrary exercise of gov't power than any of the above. The gov't should be non-descriminatory, and denying funding solely because an organization is a religious one, regardless of its merits, doesn't sound like non-discriminatory behavior to me.

      So if someone opens a Jedi alchoholic rehab center, and they do have a good rehab rate, what do I even care whether "Jedi" is a real religion or not?

    5. Re:Separation of Church and State by Atryn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Office of Faith Based Initiatives and Community Programs was created specifically for the purpose of getting more federal funding to faith-based organizations. I have no problem with equal funding for all organizations as long as it harms none.

      However, what we cannot have is a gov't program specifically designed to benefit faith-based organizations over non-faith based organizations. We also cannot have court-mandated participation in any faith-based organization because that amounts to a state endorsement of religion.

      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
  2. I can't blame him by unicron · · Score: 4, Funny

    Make them use the force to move some shit around the room. If they can do it, let them have their religion.

    Hell, make the fatter ones do 1 sit up and I'll believe they've mastered the force.

    Nerd(robotic voice): I am a Storm-Trooper!

    Triumph the Wonder Dog(robotic voice, mockingly): You are a huge nerd!

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    1. Re:I can't blame him by Sc00ter · · Score: 3, Informative
      You can believe in the force and not be a Jedi.. Jedi's have some powers, the ability to "move shit around the room" is one of them.

      Saying your religion is "Jedi" is the same as listing your religion is "Cardinal"

  3. aussie construction projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    "certain facilities might not be built that otherwise would be"

    They need to know if they should build the Death Star or not!

    1. Re:aussie construction projects by Guppy · · Score: 3, Funny

      "They need to know if they should build the Death Star or not!"

      I'm guessing not -- the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant when compared to the power of the Force.

  4. False information? by bmetzler · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "If, for example, people of a particular religious affiliation do not provide the correct information, certain facilities might not be built that otherwise would be."

    I presume that people who write Jedi on their census form are most agnostics and other non-religious people who would have otherwise not answered at all on the census. So the Australian religious budget would not go to them to begin with. Why not have a little fun? It doesn't hurt anything, except for a few hours for the census department to remove the figures from there total.

    Now if a person from a legitimate religion answered Jedi, and therefore has caused less dollars to go to his religious organization, I say he gets what he deserves.

    -Brent
    1. Re:False information? by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 5, Funny
      Because in most countries, lying on your census is illegal. Hence the hubbub.

      They didn't lie on their census forms.*waves hand*

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    2. Re:False information? by Quixadhal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And just who does the government think they are in deciding what is or is not "correct information"?

      As far as I'm concerned, there is no "correct" answer to religion. By definition, it's what YOU (personally) believe, and has nothing to do with any organizations that might think they somehow represent your worldview.

      I, personally, would like to see organized religion stop sucking away all my tax money (by claiming excemption, all the churches force ME to pay higher taxes and carry THEIR part of the burden). I recognize that some few of them do good work for the community, but I also see constant remodelling of perfectly good church buildings, and very nice cars the clergy drive.

      Government is not God, although perhaps the Australian government thinks it is...

    3. Re:False information? by RevAaron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why would some other joke of a religion be deserving of the money? The tenants behind the philosophy of the Jedi are very much so based in beliefs found in "real" religions throughout human history.

      How would this money get diverted from "real" religions that abuse the money? There isn't a central Austrialian Jedi Order Church to give the money to, so I imagine it wouldn't be allocated to the first guy that claimed to be the JediPope.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    4. Re:False information? by hyphz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except that this has a kicker that's been mentioned loads of times here - by the same logic you could ask a Christian to turn water into wine and, if he can't do it, he's not a Christian.

      Belonging to "the Jedi religion" need not be the same as being a Jedi, just as belonging to "the Christian religion" is not the same as being Christ.

    5. Re:False information? by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Belonging to "the Jedi religion" need not be the same as being a Jedi, just as belonging to "the Christian religion" is not the same as being Christ.

      You're comparing Apples to Hydrogen. Believing you are a Jedi, you try the mind trick. It doesn't work. That doesn't mean you aren't a Jedi, it just means you are bad at the mind trick. If a Christian can't turn water into wine, all that means is that the Christian simply isn't the second coming of Christ. It doesn't mean that he doesn't believe in the Christ.

      And the Christ wasn't a member of the Christian religion ethier. By all accounts, he was a Jewish carpenter, possibly a Rabii. Perhaps the first Jedi will turn out to be a Hindu cab driver.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
  5. Re:False? by Chainsaw76 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apparently they will haev to prove they are, or at least were members of the Jedi Relegion. Perhaps a questionare Would be appropriate..

    1. Have you ever tried to convince someone that the driods in your possession were NOT in fact the driods they were looking for?

    2. Did you ever have a crush on Princess Leah but had a strange feeling the cosmos would never let it happen.. Not even realizing she was your sister?

    3. While drivign down the street at night have you ever turned off your headlights and driven using only the force? did you live?

    Of course if it were me and they were asking me to proove I was of the Jedi faith, Id insist they make the christians prove they were christians.. Do you love thy neighbor even when they are mowing the lawn at 5am on a sunday.. Etc..

    -Jason

  6. They will certify the Jedi religion by dr_dank · · Score: 3, Funny

    when followers bring in doctors notes testifying to their "midichlorian count".

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    1. Re:They will certify the Jedi religion by JahToasted · · Score: 4, Funny
      "midichlorian count"

      Hey that's from the New Testament. Orthodox Jedis don't believe in that shit...

  7. Re:Australia has no freedom of religion? by vidarh · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Who are you to say that those people don't really define themselves as Jedi? I can think of a large number of more ridiculous religions that have followers that take it really seriously (enough so to account for quite a few mass suicides, for instance).

    Ultimately I doubt the census bureau will try to do anything, as it is next to impossible to prove anything about a religion - after all a religion is based on faith and beliefs, not proofs, and any attempt to push people on it might lead to uncomfortable decisions affecting "real" religions...

  8. Uh, what about Scientology? by jsimon12 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Scientology was fiction, L God Hubbard was actually a decent sci-fi author till he started beliving what he was writing was divine (hence he started his religion).

    As for fiction in modern religion, other then the fact that Jesus was a person, and was killed, we don't have much other proof to support the stories in the bible. Who knows maybe 2000 years from now people will worship Yoda as a person? I think the point is sure Jedi is a fictional concept, but who knows there isn't much proof that other religions are little more (and don't come back with the "Word of God" stuff, cause that is just bringing dogma into a factual argument).

  9. Of course the gov't acts based on faith beliefs... by clary · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Government shouldn't be allocating resources based on folks faith beliefs.

    Of course the US government acts (and allocates resources) based on faith beliefs of citizens. The US is a representative republic, and so the actions of government reflect, to some extent at least, the will of the people. For many people, their faith beliefs affect their wills more than any other single factor.

    The US is also properly a constitutional republic, and to the extent that we pay attention to the US Constitution, governmental action is limited. For example, the Constitution would obviously forbid establishing the Lutheran Church as the official church of the country, even if 90% of the citizens were Lutheran. However, it does not keep Lutherans from lobbying for laws that fit their particular views.

    (Note: I just picked Lutheran out of a hat as an example. Don't read more into it than that.)
    --

    "Rub her feet." -- L.L.

  10. Re:How is it fraud? by Stonehand · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What is the Jedi doctrine? Do they even /pretend/ to adhere to it other than when filling out a Census form? Does it otherwise affect their lives in a significant way?

    Their are practices and beliefs associated with Druidism and the Wiccan faith. A person can't reasonably _be_ a Druid just by calling himself one momentarily on a piece of paper, any more than it's reasonable to claim to be a Catholic while taking a page from the feminist movement and worshipping Athena as the goddess of Wisdom.

    --
    Only the dead have seen the end of war.
  11. Re:Quite SImple by geekoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    bad example.
    That had mpore to do with politics and a pissy pope then it had to do with religeon.

    Did you know the cathlic church built and maintian one of the planets first observatories?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  12. Read what you wrote.... by jsimon12 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Their are practices and beliefs associated with Druidism and the Wiccan faith. A person can't reasonably _be_ a Druid just by calling himself one momentarily on a piece of paper, any more than it's reasonable to claim to be a Catholic while taking a page from the feminist movement and worshipping Athena as the goddess of Wisdom.

    People claim to be religions and do things contrary to them all the time. Does that make the Catholic who gets an abortion guilty of commiting fruad on their census by claiming to be a Catholic even though they don't strictly adhere to doctrine? Or the Mormon who drinks? Or the Druid that eats meat and hunts? etc etc etc. That is why we have freedom of religion in the US, so someones concepts for a religion don't have to apply to mine, then again the government doesn't fund/build churchs here either.

    My point is you are singleing out Jedi's becuase it offends you, and not seeing the bigger picture that this "fraud" as you state it goes on ALL the time.

  13. jedi is very similar to hinduism by cpex · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually the jedi faith is very similar to hinduism in it beliefs about the force being vreated by all living things. I didnt write the following excerpt but thought I would post it here. ______ It is a very little known fact that George Lucas, the creator of the Star Wars world, has strong Hindu beliefs. Just as Hinduism affects our lives, so has it affected his, which can be shown by the fact that he has incorporated Hindu themes throughout the Star Wars trilogy. This essay will touch, through various examples, the way Lucas has weaved Hinduism into his movies. Of the trilogy, The Empire Strikes Back seems to portray Hinduism in the fullest sense. Specifically, the part when Luke Skywalker goes to find Yoda. When he first arrives, Luke finds himself in a forest, looking for the old, wise Yoda to learn the ways of the Jedi. This is very like Hindu's Janoi (Gujarati), where young males run to the forest in search of the old, wise yogi, who would provide great knowledge. Just as a yogi "tests" potential students on their patience to enter into the arduous task of learning, so does Yoda "test" Luke by not telling him who he is. His purpose, of course, was seeing if Luke had patience or not. As the training progresses, Luke learns to control what is called "the Force." Yoda explains that everything is part of the Force, such as the "...the tree, the rock..." etc. This Force is very similar to the Hindu concept of the One or the Universe (in essence Om). In Hinduism it is said that we are all part of the One, just like what Yoda said about the Force. Simply put, it is concluded that Yoda was referring to "the Force" as the Force of the One. Luke also learns about illusion. In one scene, he tries to pickup his X-wing with the Force, but fails. Yoda explains that one should not judge anything by it's size (in essence, what we see is an illusion). He calls all material items "crude matter" and that these are the not the things to judge with. This scene illustrates the Hindu concept that life is an illusion (or Maya). During the same training scenes, Luke gets a vision of his friends in trouble. Luke then prepares to leave to save his friends. Yoda persuades him not to go by saying that he must finish his training because it is more important. This exemplifies the Hindu concept of duty over family. The duty over family lesson can be seen in stories like the Bhagavad-Gita, where Lord Krishna tells Arjun to fight his cousins, despite his feelings for them, because it is his duty. At then end of the training scenes, as Luke is leaving, Ben Kenobi warns Luke to never "give into anger and hate." This lesson of benevolence is also taught by Mohandas Gandhi, which he derived from Hinduism. Besides the training scenes, there are other areas of Star Wars that portray Hinduism. For example, the concept of destiny. In Star Wars, the word "destiny" is used many times in the context of fulfilling one's destiny. This is very similar to duty. Another example is the father-son relationship between Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker. This parallels with Krishna and his uncle who are both related and nemesis. Finally, one last example, Luke, being the only son, cremates Darth Vader at the end of Return of the Jedi. Though I have heard of other religions cremating, it is a predominantly Hindu ritual. In the above examples I have suggested a few connections between Hinduism and Star Wars. Of course, these are arguable, but they are a starting point in which to provoke thought. -Rajan Rajbhandari, 1994

  14. Byebye organized religion by gosand · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Make them use the force to move some shit around the room. If they can do it, let them have their religion.

    If you had to prove your religious beliefs existed, say goodbye to all organized religion.

    Not that it would be a bad thing.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:Byebye organized religion by karlm · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I could probably do better than that Nasa photograph with a few hours on GIMP.

      Isn't that moon rock very very similar to rocks on earth?

      The use ofelectricity inside the case of a computer is part of the hoax. It really does use magic.

      The parent's point is that your evidence is still consistant with the hoax theory. Is it simpler to believe that someone used GIMP, or that someone actually built a huge rocket to boost a very heavy camera at such a velocity that it will eventually leave Sol's gravitational influence, just to send back a few photos? Give me a few million dollars for some JPEGs of the solar system, and I know how I'm getting the JPEGs. I might also point out that you cannot prove that the Earth revolves about the Sun. For an earth-bound reference point, Sol orbits Earth and pretty much everything else orbits Sol. Earth has the unique distinction of being the only planet about which Sol orbits.

      Now, as far as evidence for the claims of Christianity, you have more early manuscripts of most of the boks of the Bible than you do for any of Shakespear's works, and you have a pretty good geographic distribution of the manuscripts. You have a corroborating document by the non-Christian Roman historian Justinian. You have the question of why the Roman goverment didn't simple produce the body of Jesus when his cult they tried to squash started spreading rumors that he was up and roaming about.

      Now, I'm not really asserting any of these claims. I'm just saying that the stuff you presented isn't very scientifically or historically convincing. Be careful about pointing your finger at the fool when you may be found even more foolish.

      I agree that people are sheep. However, I tink you fail to realize how much of your "knowledge" you take on blind faith. Oh.. but.. but.. it's not blind faith, it's self-consistant. Most itelligent people in most faiths have come up with an interpretation that is self-consistant. I'm not saying I don't trust the scientific method, I'm saying don't think you're above taking things on "blind faith". I've had some coursework in special relativity. I understand and believe it. As far as anything more complicated in physics goes, I take it on blind faith. Some theories in the past have been shown wrong. Some of the things in physics I take on blind faith will later be shown to be in error. You may be less foolish than I, but I doubt you are much less foolish than I.

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
  15. A Real Jedi Response by Steve+B · · Score: 5, Funny
    "I don't need to fill out your silly forms."
    You don't need to fill out our silly forms.

    "All you need to do is count how many people live here."
    All we need to do is count how many people live here.

    "Just move along."
    I'll just move along.

    --
    /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
  16. Urban Legend by gosand · · Score: 3, Informative
    Snopes has listed this for almost a year.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  17. Geek Orthodox by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    What if you just made something up for the form? What if you put "Linusian", "Openus Sourcinerous", "United Temple of The Perl", "Orthodox Geek", etc.....?

  18. Urban Legend by rubinson · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those not reading the article (and to provide a little background), last year a hoax circulated throughout both the UK and Australia that if enough people marked "Jedi" on their census form, that it would become a nationally recognized religion. This was never true.

    What made some people believe that it was true was that, in Britain, it was eventually revealed that "Jedi" was getting a specific response code assigned to it (e.g., people who wrote in "Jedi" as their response were getting assigned a value such as "746" for their religion). The fact that the "Jedi" responses were being recorded made some people believe that the hoax was true.

    However, in many surveys, responses that pass a certain numerical threshold are often assigned a distinct numerical code. This doesn't actually mean anything; it's simply to aid in the tabulation of the results. For analysis purposes, "Jedi" was always going to be grouped into "N/A" or "Other" or "Refused to Answer" (I'm not realy sure which; depends upon how they want to deal with it).

    All the details can be found here.

  19. The census is irritating by lpontiac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A lot of people here seem to have a healthy contempt for these 70,000 Australians. I'd like to point out that it's not quite as sad as it seems. We're not talking about something that takes a lot of effort. And in particular, these people weren't trying to make any sort of serious point.

    Simply put, the census is a royal pain in the ass and if your typical Australian knows of a way to poke fun at it without criminal sanction, he'll do so.

  20. Re:Christianity's truth by SirSlud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But he conveniently neglects to mention all the other religions have aspects that no other religion shares. Each religion has nothing unique, or it wouldn't be a seperate religion. So theres nothing to stop me from saying religion X, which doesn't have Ressurected Christ (not sure why thats such a showstopper anyhow, but lets ignore that for now), but *does* have aspect Y, which no other religion has, is The One!

    Thats my point. They're all unique, or they wouldn't be seperate reason. He might as well say, "I bought a Ford because it was the only car with the Ford logo on it!"

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  21. Is the question even meaningful? by verloren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't believe in a deity. I respect people who do because I'm a respectful person, but I think their views are ludicrous. Asking my religion (optionally or not) is like asking me what type of dragons I believe in - it's not that I happen not to believe, I don't believe because there's nothing to believe in. (pauses for response from the Draco-Human Anti-Defamation League)

    So if asked a bizarre question about religion, dragons or anything else, I'd feel perfectly entitled to put a bizarre answer. Cargo cults believed that planes were linked to God, why shouldn't I think a film is?

  22. Definition of a religion under US law by jbolden · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I figured as a point of interest it was worth citing what is required by the IRS to be considered a religion. The IRS was picked because its the only body that would care:

    The organization must be organized and operated exclusively for religious, educational,
    scientific, or other charitable purposes,

    Net earnings may not inure to the benefit of any private individual or shareholder,

    No substantial part of its activity may be attempting to influence legislation,

    The organization may not intervene in political campaigns, and

    No part of the organization's purposes or activities may be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.

    And that's it. So under US laws the Jedi church would qualify (if it existed in the US).

    1. Re:Definition of a religion under US law by bakes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No substantial part of its activity may be attempting to influence legislation

      Such as influencing abortion, stem cell research or homosexual marriage legislation, for example?

      --
      Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
  23. Do they accept Scientology? by Arcturax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I mean, seriously, Scientology is no more or less fiction than Star Wars is.

    --

    --Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
  24. Re:Of course the gov't acts based on faith beliefs by cheezedawg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And there is another small group of nitwits in the US that thinks that the establishment clause in the first amendment means that the Government can't even mention anything remotely religious. Don't you ever get tired of screaming "Separation of Church and State!" (a phrase that never appears in the Constitution, btw).

    --
    "The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
  25. Re:Of course the gov't acts based on faith beliefs by ShavenYak · · Score: 3, Funny

    (Note: I just picked Lutheran out of a hat as an example. Don't read more into it than that.)

    Oh, I thought it was because you had created them in a petri dish from one of your teeth and some cola.

    Damn it, is there any topic that can't have a Simpsons reference thrown into it?

    --

    Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  26. Have you noticed... by uncoveror · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have you noticed that no subject turns us into hostile camps of "us" and "them," sniping at each other, quite like religion? If we were not separated by cyberspace we would be fighting, and perhaps even killing each other right now. Not exactly love, peace, and brotherhood of man, is it? This story was supposed to give us a laugh! So is this one. Maybe laughter can chase away the anger and hate, and bring us a moment of joy.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  27. All religions are basically fictions by wytcld · · Score: 3, Interesting
    All religions are basically fictions and fictions are good for you, if they're good fictions. Societies need shared myths, and fresh myths are best - thus the shuffling of them over the ages, as new ones supplant old. It's not that the new ones are better - in fact it's much like pop music, where occassionally you get a real advance (Beatles) but more often get trash novelty (fill in current robotic boy group or rapper).

    Now, nation states themselves are in large part fictions. So which other fictions should they associate with and invest in? Should a state appropriate, even nationalize, a good fiction when one comes along? Should George II wear his Mickey Mouse hat on state occassions? Should he carry a cross? Should Saddam be let to live a few more years if he'll just play along and dress like Darth?

    Even the most "realistic" views of the world are largely fictions. It's time to take conscious control of our choices here; and more than anything it's time for some new religions which are compatible with, but broader than, science. The precise place to find these is the field known as science fiction - duh.

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  28. They Did Not Lie On Their Forms by guttentag · · Score: 3, Insightful
    From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913):
    Religion \Re*li"gion\, n.

    Strictness of fidelity in conforming to any practice, as if it were an enjoined rule of conduct.

    Many people colloquially think of religion as a very narrowly-defined book, clergy and place of worship -- usually their own religion and those of their friends. They go to church, they listen, they recite whatever they're supposed to say and for the next several days they can tell everyone they're a good _____.

    They scoff at anything outside their narrowly-defined concept of a "genuine" religion. "That's not a real relgion, it's just an excuse to _____." "They're just thumbing their noses at us devout _____s, they're not religious." "I've never heard of anyone belonging to _____; it must be a fake."

    Religion is much broader than that. Religion is about closely-held beliefs. In the United States we have what's known as "Freedom of Religion." Many people interpret this to simply mean that the government cannot prevent you from going to church/praying/etc. The Constitutional amendment which provides "Freedom of Religion" is also focused on "Freedom of Speech." The whole idea is "Freedom of Ideas." The government cannot tell you your your beliefs are wrong without solid proof

    "Your belief that God is dead is wrong because God lives in every man," doesn't fly. "Your belief that you have a mandate from God to murder people of other religions is wrong, because you are harming another person," is valid.

    This distinction is very important. When a government can condemn ideas or mandate ideas without the burden of proof, its leaders attain totalitarian power. The power to define valid religions/beliefs translates into the power to define facts and reality, and the government will evolve into a self-serving dictatorship.

    I don't care for Star Wars, and I don't think any one of these people can levitate rocks. But I do believe there are many people who are religiously fanatical about Star Wars. I'm not going to ridicule people for claiming Jedi as their religion or accuse them of lying about their beliefs, because their beliefs are just as valid as yours and mine.

    I don't pity these "Jedi" for their beliefs. I pity them for living in Australia. In the U.S., the government doesn't have the right to suppress beliefs by calling them lies.

  29. Australian Officials by Ironpoint · · Score: 3, Insightful



    If Australian officials don't like the answer they shouldn't ask the queston in the first place.

  30. Aboriginal religions, languages by billstewart · · Score: 3, Informative
    The 1996 .AU census specified 7 Christian groups, plus an "Other" fill-in-the-blank. The 2001 version adds Islam and Buddhism. I couldn't find any 2001 religion results on the site - I assume they're not done yet, though they've hit high-priority topics such as population and attendance at sporting events.... There weren't any reported Jedi in 1996 :-)


    Neither the religion nor the language sections explicitly mention Aboriginal religions or languages, though about 7000 people wrote that in on the 1996 form, and a number of other people wrote in "Nature Religions", which may include some aboriginals as well as neo-pagans. The Ancestry section does include "Australian", and there is also an explicit question asking if you're an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and there are some specific instructions for Australian South Sea Islanders as well.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  31. Re:How is it fraud? by DarkZero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What is the Jedi doctrine? Do they even /pretend/ to adhere to it other than when filling out a Census form? Does it otherwise affect their lives in a significant way?

    I really don't see a huge difference between Star Wars geeks going to Star Wars conventions, where they dress up as Jedi Knights, listen to their chosen leaders (Star Wars actors, writers, etc.), and rant and rave about how great Star Wars is, and Christians going to church, where they dress up in "proper clothing" (formal attire), listen to their chosen leaders (priests, deacons, selected speakers, etc.), and rant and rave about how great Jesus is. The only real difference that is see is that one side is adoring a film work and the other side is adoring a written work.

  32. Same story as for New Zealand by Lenbok · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here is some information from Statistics NZ about the NZ equivalent. Two obvious conclusions from this: with 1.5% of the population, the Jedi faith is much stronger in New Zealand; and statisticians have no sense of humour.

    --
    Thanks for your enquiry. There were 53,715 people who identified
    themselves as Jedi in response to the question on religious affiliation.
    This was 1.5 % of the people who responded to the question.

    For your information, most people realise the importance of the Census
    and therefore provide meaningful and accurate answers. The religion
    question, which has been asked in the Census since 1851, asks people
    to identify what religion, if any, they affiliate with. They may elect
    not to answer this question. If people's belief system was genuinely
    Jedi, they could mark the "other" box and write Jedi in the space
    provided. These data were captured during the processing phase but have
    been coded as "Response outside Scope". Jedi is not part of the
    agreed list of religious affiliations noted in the New Zealand Standard
    classification. Hence it will not appear in the official results from
    the Census.

  33. What were the other choices? by HiThere · · Score: 3

    I suspect that Jedi might be closer to my choice than any of the other options. I doubt that they would have liked "Reformed Druids of North America", either, but that's been my religion for the last 30 years. I'm not very dedicated, despite being ordained, but it matches my views better than any of the competition that I've run into.

    Why do people assume that it is a joke when people claim Jedi as their religion? I'm not at all sure that it is. Religions can probably start in many ways, I have know devout members of "The Church of All Worlds". I didn't think that they understood the revealed doctrine (see Stranger in a Strange Land) very well, but they were sincerely misguided. And devout. Some of them did jail time over it.

    I'm sure that many entered the term Jedi as a joke, but I see no reason to believe that all did, and even so I would bet that many who entered it as a joke were as devout as many of those who entered Anglican (Episcopal?).

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  34. Re:Of course the gov't acts based on faith beliefs by spongebobsquarepants · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, and I get just as tired of the hearing ill-informed religious zealots crying over the threat of the phrase, "under god," being removed from the pledge, when that phrase was added after the fact by President Eisenhauer. Try saying the pledge without those two words. I think that the phrase, "one nation indivisible," sounds more meainingful anyway, and doesn't alienate any portion of the public whether Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Atheist, or otherwise.

  35. Not illegal in the UK by robstah · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Although supplying misleading information on a census form in the UK is a criminal offence, interestingly there is an exemption for religion. Enough people put Jedi on the 2001 and census to have it added to the list according to the BBC. However the information on how many will not be made publically available. However its presence on the list does not mean it is officially recognized. This article points out that it is all a hoax and that it wont be added to the list. Hhh, conflicting ideas from the same media source, i dont believe it =) Cheers Rob

    --
    Rob 'robster' Bradford
    Debian Planet Guy
    We are the apt. You will be packaged. Resistance is futile.
  36. Jedi recognised in UK by Martin+S. · · Score: 3, Informative

    Jedi was recognised in the recent UK census as a statically significant category.
    http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001 /pdfs/secti on5part3.pdf (Page 18)

    However what I found really interesting was some of the other choices in the ~150 different categories including:

    Scientology
    Nearly 100 different versions of Christianity.
    Heathen, Atheist, Agnostic, Realist, Idealist, Rationalist, Humanist, Secularist.