Slashdot Mirror


Canadian Census: 20,000 Jedi Worshippers

Lev13than writes "Canada.com is reporting that some 20,000 Canadians listed "Jedi" as their religion in the last national census (2001). Apparently this is the offshoot of an Internet joke which originated in Australia a few years back. The results are interesting on a couple of levels. While it show that some people may have too much time on their hands, it also raises questions of privacy rights, Internet activism and data integrity. Although it's not statistically significant given Canada's population of 31.5 million, 20,000 lightsabre-wielding census-takers is nothing to sneeze at. StatsCan's full report (with no mention of Jedis) can be found here."

79 of 455 comments (clear)

  1. In other news.... by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 5, Funny

    There are about 20,000 single guys who enjoy D&D and star wars in Canada!

    --
    --------
    Free your mind.
    1. Re:In other news.... by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Though they're not quite as bad as the Klingon speaking mentally ill in Oregon...

    2. Re:In other news.... by Flounder · · Score: 3, Funny
      There are about 20,000 single guys who enjoy D&D and star wars in Canada!

      What about us married guys that enjoy D&D and Star Wars? We still can't get laid, but at least now we've got an excuse. We're married.

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

    3. Re:In other news.... by Flounder · · Score: 3, Funny

      I was going to put some witty comeback here. But I guess I don't need to. Screwing my wife is punishment enough for you.

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

    4. Re:In other news.... by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Getting married will kill your sexlife 9 times out of 10. The one guy is the lucky bastard :)

      --
      Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    5. Re:In other news.... by canadian_right · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Not true! Have you not heard the popular saying:
      Get married and get it regular.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    6. Re:In other news.... by CoolVibe · · Score: 2, Informative
      Get married and get it regular.

      That's merely advertising. Do you believe everything that is advertised?

      But hey, if it does seem to work out for some people, more power to them. But not me. Oh no. I'll stop before I get off topic... mmm... I'm already off topic... drat...

    7. Re:In other news.... by Fjan11 · · Score: 2, Funny

      True. Once a year is regular :-/

      --
      This sig is just as redundant as the rest of this posting
    8. Re:In other news.... by crizh · · Score: 3, Funny

      Lucky?

      Exhausted more like. ;)

      --
      Trust The Computer, The Computer is your friend.
  2. Just Wondering by dirkdidit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's not an organized society for the Jedi religion like there is for other larger religions is there???

    1. Re:Just Wondering by swordboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's not an organized society for the Jedi religion like there is for other larger religions is there???

      I would imagine that some enterprising individuals will take advantage sooner or later. At least here in the United States, a religion gets tax-free benefits. Wouldn't it be cool if someone organized a religion and then created a business underworld to avoid the government ala scientology?

      For example,

      A business could hire a Jedi employee. But instead of paying him/her with US currency, they could be paid in Jedi Dollars - JD (insert creative currency name here). The JD's could then be spent at any participating Jedi establishment - merely tax free. If so inclined, the Jedi could ask the employer to pay in a portion of taxable US dollars or the employee could trade them at market rate.

      The opportunity is endless. When someone does implement it, I sure hope that they aren't as crooked as those fucking scientologists.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    2. Re:Just Wondering by dirkdidit · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Wouldn't it be cool if someone organized a religion and then created a business underworld to avoid the government ala scientology?

      That actually perfectly describes Catholocism(and nearly every other major religion). TV evangelists, religious TV stations, that nun on that one channel selling beads all makes money for the church in the end. But hey I guess they need to make living too.
    3. Re:Just Wondering by scotartt · · Score: 2, Funny
      Wouldn't it be cool if someone organized a religion and then created a business underworld to avoid the government ala scientology?

      SUCH A THING ALREADY EXISTS

      --
      -A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed-
    4. Re:Just Wondering by Narcissus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think it does perfectly describe any of the major religions. The people that "organised" these religions did not go on to create "a business underworld to avoid the government".

      Yes, there are "followers" of major religions that use others' beliefs to their advantage, but that was not the intent of those that "developed" the religion, unlike the parent post's comment.

    5. Re:Just Wondering by Sheriff+Fatman · · Score: 2, Funny

      There's just one fatal flaw with your otherwise excellent proposal, exemplified thus:

      Checkout Guy: That'll be $22.95, please.
      Darth Jeff: We don't have any proper money, but (waves hand) Jedi Dollars will do fine.

      You see the problem? :)

      --
      -- Open Source: It's mad, but you don't have to work here to help.
  3. They might just as well have put by Faust7 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Virgin (Y/N)?"

    1. Re:They might just as well have put by MsGeek · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, after all, Jedi have to live a life of celibacy, right?

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    2. Re:They might just as well have put by Alan+Shutko · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, they can screw, just not love....

      According to Lucas...

    3. Re:They might just as well have put by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 3, Funny

      That pissed me off so bad. What's the point in being a bad ass Jedi if you can't get your groove on? But in the movie, they say that the objection isn't moral, but that love detracts from the jedi focus and is beneath them. Does that mean that they can sleep with a bunch of chicks as long as they don't mean anything? Am I making up stuff or did some of the SW books imply that Yoda was a little green pimp?

      -B

  4. No wonder by quantaman · · Score: 4, Funny

    How else can you explain all the Americans who can't figgure out where the heck Canada is! And yes I'm Canadian :)

    p.s. This isn't the country you're looking for.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  5. What do you expect by Gefiltefish · · Score: 2, Funny


    This is no surprise. Besides drinking beer and watching hockey, what else is there to do in Canada besides using the force?

    Besides, the hairy palms insulate against the cold winters.

  6. Census takers by worst_name_ever · · Score: 5, Funny
    20,000 lightsabre-wielding census-takers is nothing to sneeze at.

    I think you mean census respondents... census-takers are the people who come to your door asking you to fill out the census form. If one of those folks whipped out a lightsaber on me I think I'd try to do an extra-good job of filling in the little bubbles...

    --

    In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
  7. Go England! by big_groo · · Score: 3, Funny
    In the U.K., for example, there are more Jedis than Jews. Nearly 400,000 people identified themselves as Jedi in the 2001 census. Only 260,000 said they were Jewish. The Jedis seemed to be concentrated in England and Wales.

    *waves hand* There is nothing to see here. Move along.

    1. Re:Go England! by Chicane-UK · · Score: 4, Informative

      I really wanted to put Jedi down on my Census, but the I had heard rumours that the UK government were going to fine people who put religion as Jedi so I chickened out.

      As it turns out, the only part of the census the government can't fine you for is the religion option... as this snippet from a 2001 Register article says here :

      We spoke to the Home Office - which was not overly entertained especially since the Census is supposed to be deadly serious. However the Home Office would not say what constituted a religion and we subsequently discovered that while you can be heavily fined for putting down false details on a census form, it does not apply to the religion question.

      Ah well... I think 400,000 was more than enough anyway ;)

      --
      "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
  8. hmmm... by jeffy124 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    (standard disclaimer: IANAL)

    I know in the US someone can register for religious recognition if they have something like 100 followers. (i dont know the exact number) The application can be accepted as long as no animal or person is sacrificed or otherwise eliminated as part of the religion's practice. Other requirements probably have to be met, but I do know that religious killings are a no-no.

    Canada probably has something similar. Maybe someone should consider institutionalizing the Jedi religion and filing the proper paperwork.

    --
    The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    1. Re:hmmm... by Greyhand · · Score: 5, Funny
      If someone set up an "official" jedi religion, George Lucas would sue the hell out of them. This in turn would set a precident allowing religions to be sued.
      1. Someone creates the official jedi religion
      2. George Lucas sues them
      3. Precident set : religions can be sued
      4. I sue the major world religions for upsetting world peace
      5. PROFIT!!!!
    2. Re:hmmm... by GMontag · · Score: 3, Informative

      The US government is Constitutionally prohibited from sanctioning any state religion. In recent decades that has been bastardized into not recognizing any religion.

      Others responding to you seem to be confusing IRS not-for-profit status with religion. They are not the same. The Catholic Church and the NAACP both enjoy not-for-profit status, but the latter is not a religion even though they both have the same tax status.

      BTW, not-for-profit != "non-profit", the former is a tax status (more precisely a not-federally-and-other-places-taxed status) and the latter means you do not make a profit. Yes, there is a huge reality difference and a small technical difference.

    3. Re:hmmm... by balthan · · Score: 2, Informative

      The US government is Constitutionally prohibited from sanctioning any state religion. In recent decades that has been bastardized into not recognizing any religion.

      "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." Seems pretty straight forward to me.

    4. Re:hmmm... by bandit450 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Finally! The missing step has been filled in! So THAT'S what I do to make heaps of money.

      --
      -- Bandit450...If-Else-Do-*TWITCH*!
    5. Re:hmmm... by Surak · · Score: 4, Funny

      Shouldn't that be,

      5. PROPHET!!!

      ? :)

    6. Re:hmmm... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right now it takes DVD-Rs 2 discs to back up a movie (dual-layer vs. single layer). It would be nice to archive my movie collections using less media.

      Bah, who cares one way or another. The government, since it's meant to represent ALL the people, should not, ever, EVER, incorporate religious doctrine, symbolism, etc, into it's workings. Yes, that includes no "under god" in the pledge of allegiance, or religious phrases on currency. Why? Because it's plainly obvious (to anyone who isn't trying to argue their way out of a corner) that the "god" mentioned is the Christian God, thus excluding all else. Clearly, this is a VERY bad thing for a government which is "by the people, for the people", and hopefully, ALL people. It results in people being excluded, because those who are not part of the "not-quite-state-sponsored" religion are left out.

      A better question is, why should the government endorse/recognize any religion at all? What purpose does this serve? WTF is the phrase "under god" included in the pledge of allegiance, other than to counter the "godless communists" of the cold war era? Frankly, I see no need for it... religion is a personal matter, and belongs in the home and in the church. It does NOT belong in the government that runs the country.

  9. Religion Question? by mharris007 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Which brings up a question; Should Religion be a question on a national census form?

    If people are getting offended by the race question on the U.S. census form, I can just imagine the number of people that are going to get pissed off by a religion question.

    --


    ---
    Mike
    I'm going to kick the next person that I see with their karma rating in their sig.
    1. Re:Religion Question? by RestiffBard · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For the people that are going to say its no one's business about this or that or how many toilets they have and so forth allow me a moment. First off, the toilet question was a real question from the 2000 US Census.

      Now, before people get up in arms there are legitimate reasons for wanting this data. And they in no way harm any citizen. They are designed to help citizens.

      For instance, the Marklar race respond that on average they earn 12,000 a year and have no indoor toilet. This lets the government know 1. Marklars may not be getting the racial equality that in the US should be mandatory. 2. Marklars are not properly being serviced by their government. This is rudimentary but you get the idea (i hope).

      as for the questions, a curious thing happened in 2000. people complained about the questions, race, toilets, salary etc... Trent Lott, then Senate Majority Leader said that if people didn't want to answer the questions then the Census had no right to compel people to do so.

      Here's the funny part. 1. the Census is meant only to count heads. 2. the other questions on the Census are tacked on by Congress 3. Congress in fact gives the Census the mandate to compel people to answer. 4. Trent Lott is an obvious asshat.

      Finally for all of you clever people that thought the Census wouldn't count you if you closed the blinds when ever an enumerator came by you're wrong. Enumerators, towards the end of the Census would park at the end of your street and count people entering and leaving. How many cars in the driveway? How many people-size shadows behind the curtains? They would make an educated guess at the number and put that down.

      Where is the 2000 Census data now? Arizona. In a big vault for the most part.

      How do I know? That's where I Fed-Exed it. I was a Census Clerk for 2000. No, I really didn't care what you wrote down.

      By the way, James Weatherby of 3247 Main St. has 5 bathrooms.

      --
      - /* dead coders leave no comments */
    2. Re:Religion Question? by soul_cmd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well acording to the Jargon File (referenced at dict.org) agnostic is a religion.

      Religion

      Agnostic. Atheist. Non-observant Jewish. Neo-pagan. Very commonly, three or more of these are combined in the same person. Conventional faith-holding Christianity is rare though not unknown.

      Even hackers who identify with a religious affiliation tend to be relaxed about it, hostile to organized religion in general and all forms of
      religious bigotry in particular. Many enjoy parody' religions such as Discordianism and the Church of the SubGenius.

      Also, many hackers are influenced to varying degrees by Zen Buddhism or (less commonly) Taoism, and blend them easily with their `native'
      religions.

      There is a definite strain of mystical, almost Gnostic sensibility that shows up even among those hackers not actively involved with neo-paganism, Discordianism, or Zen. Hacker folklore that pays homage to `wizards' and speaks of incantations and demons has too much psychological truthfulness about it to be entirely a joke.

      Though, for real definitions:
      Strictness of fidelity in conforming to any practice, as if it were an enjoined rule of conduct.

      The outward act or form by which men indicate their recognition of the existence of a god or of gods having power over their destiny, to whom obedience, service, and honor are due; the feeling or expression of human love, fear, or awe of some superhuman and overruling power, whether by profession of belief, by observance of rites and ceremonies, or by the conduct of life; a system of faith and worship; a manifestation of piety; as, ethical religions; monotheistic religions; natural religion; revealed religion; the religion of the Jews; the religion of idol worshipers.

      I suppose it just depends on your viewpoint.

    3. Re:Religion Question? by echucker · · Score: 4, Funny

      The one that really gets me is when the option of Aetheist is listed as a religion. What's that about? Anyone else tripped out by that one?

      They only have it because most census respondents don't know who the hell that CowboyNeal guy is.

    4. Re:Religion Question? by dillon_rinker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Gnostics believe that you can know. Agnostics believe you can't know. Diagnostics believe in a deeper knowledge of the divine through a better understanding of diesel mechanics.

    5. Re:Religion Question? by daveo0331 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Excerpt from Census form:

      9. Describe your religious beliefs:

      a. Christian conservative
      b. Other Christian
      c. Please add my name to John Ashcroft's list of "suspicious persons"

      --
      Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
    6. Re:Religion Question? by anagama · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you are interested in athiesm, here's a better definition.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    7. Re:Religion Question? by franimal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, I received a census form a few months back and after reading the "You are required by law to truthfully complete this survey" statement, I decided to give them a call. Guess what. That religious and race data gets used. It's available to all those congress men and women just itching to do a little social engineering and earmark funds for their various flavors of constituents. For instance, the woman I talked to indicated something along the lines of "I there is an area with a high race concentration that has difficulties they may be elligible for special funding."

      The good thing is that she also indicated that it'd be acceptable if I entered 'DECLINED' in the objectionable boxes. Even though it's really not optional ... they'd prefer that to a lie or the bother of fines/legal action.

      The really bad thing is that this data gets used and it's likely not even right! How many people intentionally enter false data? The really infuriating thing is that this data, perhaps incorrect, is used to collect information on social engineering programs like affirmative action. Yes, it makes sense. But it still drives me nuts.

    8. Re:Religion Question? by Mac+Degger · · Score: 2, Funny

      Screw it, I'll be a polytheistic athiest...in other words, I disbeleive in many gods :)

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    9. Re:Religion Question? by RealAlaskan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      For instance, the Marklar race respond that on average they earn 12,000 a year and have no indoor toilet. This lets the government know
      1. Marklars may not be getting the racial equality that in the US should be mandatory.
      2. Marklars are not properly being serviced by their government.

      1. Does this mean that short folks are going to get leg implants so they can be equal to us tall folks?
      2. If the Marklars REALLY want toilets, why can't they earn them, just like the rest of us did?

      Seriously, you're right: that's exactly the sort of thinking that lead congress-critters to put that sort of garbage on the long form. My point was that that sort of thinking varies from simply muddled to dangerously wrong.

      If racial equality (defined as average income, or anything meaningful) is to be mandatory, we'll have to begin by eliminating our constitution. How else do you propose to get the alcoholism rate on reservations down to that of the general population (or else the general population's alcoholism rate up to match theirs)? We're going to have to start holding the able back, because there's no way we're going to be able to push the unable up to match them.

      Anyone who really thinks that ``able'' correlates to race is dead wrong. But, ``able'' does correlate pretty well to culture. Look at the different success rates for new Asian and Carribean immigrants, compared to the grandchildren of earlier immigrants from those same areas. As their families acculturate here, their academic and business achievments tend to fall toward (or below) the mean for the US.

      ... Senate Majority Leader said that if people didn't want to answer the questions then the Census had no right to compel people to do so.

      Here's the funny part. 1. the Census is meant only to count heads. 2. the other questions on the Census are tacked on by Congress 3. Congress in fact gives the Census the mandate to compel people to answer.

      The constitution requires the government to count heads. The constitution therefore gives the government the power to count heads. Since there is no constitutional mandate to count toilets, any governmental power to do that would have to be found in the emanations of the penumbra of the commerce clause. Since the Supremes are starting to take a sane view of the commerce clause, as the 10th amendment requires, choosing not to require people to answer the questions may well be the better part of valor: congress may not have felt that it was worth trying to defend the long form before the Supreme court. On a side note, the long form is out (too intrusive, said congress), to be replaced with the American Community Survey, whose funding is in danger. We may just not know about toilet counts in future years. Just like we didn't for most of our history.

      Where is the 2000 Census data now? Arizona. In a big vault for the most part.

      The forms may be in Arizona, but the data is in a big mainframe in Washington, D.C. Aggregated, perturbed-to-preserve-privacy summaries have been sent (via CD and DVD) all over the US, so that dangerously muddle-headed politicians and civil servants can use it to show that more of someone else's money needs to be spent on the civil servants, in the name of the Marklars.

    10. Re:Religion Question? by ajs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The one that really gets me is when the option of Aetheist is listed as a religion

      In that sense, Atheist is being used as a "none of the above", which is a more valid use than some I've seen.

      Is atheism a religion? I'm willing to roughly define religion as "a belief system, generaly characterized by the personification of natural forces, worship of same and a system of ritual." In that sense no, atheism is not a religion.

      On the other hand, if you simply defined it as, "a set of beliefs concerning a system of one or more deities," then yes, atheism is a religion, at least as practiced by some.

      I have a friend, for example who has what I would characterize as a "deep and irrational faith" in the non-existance of all gods and the evils of all religion. This is his core faith in the way the universe works, and I can't really make a strong distinction between that and believing that the Post Office box down the street created the universe in 22 nanoseconds out of the belly-button lint of Winston Churchill.

      I, on the other hand am a strict agnostic. I have reached what I consider to be one of only three rational conclusions about religion: that we currently have no conclusive proof that there are any deities, and even if George Burns poped into my living room today and whisked my off to a distant galaxy to show me wonders beyond my imagining, I would still have no proof of anything but a George Burns-looking guy with some amazing abilities (at least to make me see cool stuff, if not actually manifest cool stuff) and a god-complex.

      The other two rational conclusions are a) Pascal was a jerk for pointing it out, but he was right... choose a religion based on the degree of the negative outcome it predicts and hope you're right (note, such people are still technically agnostic in my book) and b) There are more important things to wory about. Enjoy the sun-rise and then get back to work.

      FWIW: When I was about 10, I realized that I was an atheist (I didn't know the term agnostic, much less "strict agnostic" at the time), and in thinking about what that meant I was perhaps more terrified than I have ever been. It's a big deal for a 10 year old to have to face the insignificance of his own existance all at once, but I got over it and decided that I wanted to enjoy it while it lasted anyway.

      I've since refined my sense of ethics based, not on fear of reprisals by a deity, but on the drives that I have in terms of a comfortable society of tolerant peers. Woefully there are too many folks in the world who will never introspect to that degree. For them, religion seems a fair way to deliver a moral and ethical outlook that they'll never have the inclination to generate for themselves.

    11. Re:Religion Question? by CharlieG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just one nit to pick - although your description of how the census works is PERFECT I have one problem with

      2. Marklars are not properly being serviced by their government

      Where does it say that it's the Government's job to make sure that Marklars have the same number and kinds of toilets?
      It's fairly obvious that it's NOT interstate commerce, even if that is the excuse the courts use!

      The Federal Government upsurps way to many powers that were reserved for the states or the people, but thats the way it's been since "The switch in time that saved nine"

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    12. Re:Religion Question? by CharlieG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can see that being the job of the LOCAL government (plumbing in the streeet), but the actual toilet, and the hookup? Private matter IMHO.

      So, if we assume this is part of the State/local/private section, why is the FEDERAL government asking?

      Of course, I still believe we are supposed to be "several states" with a common interest, and that the rights of the state outweigh the rights of the Federation, and that the rights of the person are greater than that of the State - In fact, the State/Federation have NO rights, they have powers GRANTED them - rights remain the provision of the people (and G_d, if you believe in one).

      Of course, this argument got kinda bloody the last time it was resolved. I agree with the North on the Slavery issue, but with the South on the States Rights issue

      That said, TIGER files are kinda useful :)

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    13. Re:Religion Question? by CharlieG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know that communities get funding from the Feds - and THAT is part of what I'm complaining about - it's NONE of the Federal Governments business - hense me reference to "the switch in time that saved nine" - The USSC was going to rule that much of FDRs "New deal" was an illegal upsurpation of State/local rights, and FDR let the USSC know that although he could not impeach them, if they DID rule against him, there was no law saying that the USSC had to only have 9 justices, and he would appoint enough new justices to allow the new deal to pass - The USSC changed their mind. It's the whole process of the erosion of States Rights via 2 main clauses - "General welfare" and "Interstate Commerce" - In fact, there had been NO rulings against the Federal Government expanding based upon "Interstate Commerce" until about 10 years ago. It was a BIG deal when the USSC finally said "No" Heck, there are laws on the books that have been upheald beacuse the wheat a farmer COULD grow COULD be entered into interstate commerce - and if THAT isn't a stretch...

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
  10. Originated in NZ then UK by MrOrn · · Score: 5, Informative
    Actually the Jedi answer for the census form started in New Zealand, then spread to the UK around April 2001. Australia's census wasn't until October.



    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/new_med ia /1271380.stm

  11. Use the Force eh? by oogoliegoogolie · · Score: 5, Funny

    The force will be with you, always, you hoser!

  12. OSQ by Cyno01 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Homer: "Marge, anyone could miss Canada. All tucked away down there."

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    1. Re:OSQ by echucker · · Score: 2, Funny

      Another Simpsons classic...

      Gordie - "I moved here from Canada, and they think I'm slow, eh."

  13. And if IIRC, by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 4, Funny
    the number of "Jedi Worshippers" in Australia dropped dramatically in a census taken after Episode Two came out.

    Nothing like a sucky sequel to weed out the unbelievers.

    All of a sudden, I have this vision of a bunch of Christians in ancient Corinth, huddled around the latest of Paul's writings. "Wait, this sucks so much compared to his first letter! That's it, I'm leaving!"

    ;-)

    --
    "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
  14. Of course we use the force. by csguy314 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why do you think we're so damn good at hockey?

    --
    This is left as an exercise for the reader.
  15. Re:Significant sosiology phenomena by anagama · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hell - people believe in a lot of religions. At least this one has special effects you can actually see ... something other religions fail at miserably. I mean it's all fiction, might as well pick one that comes with a movie.

    If I was gonna pick though, I'd want something Romulan. Romulan chicks are hot!

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  16. Obvious...? by DirtyJ · · Score: 5, Funny
    From the report: Prior to 1971, fewer than 1% of the Canadian population reported having no religion. In 2001, that percentage increased to 16% of the population.

    I find their lack of faith disturbing.

    [ducks]

  17. And so what? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the UK, some 390,000 individuals are followers of the force But as the original Canada.com article notes, the Jedi religion choce may have been a protest agains the government surveying religious preference.

  18. But because its Canada.. by marcushnk · · Score: 5, Funny

    That would make them Sith, eh? :-P

    --
    "Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
  19. What angers me... by Davak · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What angers me is that everybody assumes that these people do not actually Worship jedi!

    Articles and films already exist regarding this spiritual movement.

    Plus, we already admit that other such religions exist:

    - Star Trek - Leonard Nimoy Should Eat More Salsa Foundation

    - Hicks - Love thy Mullet

    - Plastic surgery - Cosmetics for the holy

    Anyway...

    Davak

  20. Dodgy reporting? by gwernol · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So if as the article claims:

    "Statistics Canada didn't report the number of people who responded Jedi in tables listing response rates for other religions, saying that their analysis did not include the "media-driven'' response, in part because the sample was so small. However, statisticians did when asked produce tables showing a much smaller number of Rastafarians, Scientologists and Satanists."

    How do they know that 20,000 Canadians declared themselves to be Jedi? Could it be (gasp) just a number that the web site made up so it could write a story about the NZ and UK census returns?

    --
    Sailing over the event horizon
  21. why couldn't they just follow a normal religion? by SHEENmaster · · Score: 4, Funny

    like Oprahism?

    Anyone remember the Star Trek religion on futurama? All the worshippers were killed by being tossed into volcanoes, the method most befitting virgins.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  22. Ack, Damn Aussies always manage to get the credit! by bad_fx · · Score: 2, Informative

    It actually "originated" in New Zealand, in the March 2001 census (cf August in Australia)... I remember cause I did it myself in the NZ census which was the first in the world dangit.

    Though I hear the actual email which started the whole thing may have come from the UK, not sure which.

    This is Russell Crowe all over again.. when he's winning oscars he's an Australian... but when he's getting totally pissed and trying (and failing) to beat the crap out of some guy he's a Kiwi... *Sigh*

    Regards,
    A disgruntled New Zealander

  23. Story by quantaman · · Score: 4, Funny

    A few years ago, BEFORE the Episode 1 came out, we named our soccer team "The Jedi". I played fullback and during one game I was having a particularly easy time thwarting the the opposing teams attempts to get by me. Finally one play I miscalculated and a player with the ball slipped by me and started to rush up the field, about 2 seconds after he got by he collapsed with a leg cramp and had to roll himself off the field. For the rest of the season my team was convinced I had used The Force :)

    --
    I stole this Sig
  24. A Time-Honored Tradition by ewhac · · Score: 4, Informative

    When I first read about this phenomonon, I thought it sounded familiar to something some prankster did many years ago. Now, in this Age of Google, I have found the original article.

    The article deals with the propogation of "memes" -- infectious ideas that take on a life of their own (e.g. "All your base..."). It discusses in particular how the author faced what he thought was a rather impudent question on his college admission form -- asking for his religion -- and, with his cheeky response, inadvertently started a meme. It also discusses how the meme was extinguished by the college administration.

    The religious meme thing is about one-third of the way down, but I recommend reading the whole article. It's a good read.

    Schwab

  25. Overall Religious stats are quite telling by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 5, Funny

    16% of Canadians have "no religion", from 12% in the 1991 census. That's nearly 5 million people in a country of 30 million. Europe and the U.K. have similar makeups. B.C. leads Canada in the "no religion" category at 35% and it is also the largest religious group in the Province.

    Also quite interesting was the shift from mainstream Protestantism to groups such as "born again" and "evangelical christian" (121% increase)and perhaps "no religion" (43% increase) or the eastern religions (roughly 85% increase). Not sure if that indicates an ideological shift or one of identity with respect to "christian". Certainly the rise in Muslin, Sikh, etc. practice can be traced to immigration, Canada has experienced enourmous diversity since the 1991 census.

    I tried to find similar information on the U.S. Census website, but was unable.

    Now, we get to the bottom of a comment where Slashdotters rarely spend time. This is where the real meat and potatoes of many comments are made. Not is this case. I am taking this space to talk of my collection of women's undergarments. Why was this not included on the census form? Surely there are large numbers of lingerie collecting atheist computer geeks out there, how could this be overlooked?

  26. Words of Wisdome to Canadian Jedi by Jedi+Holocron · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do or do not, eh.

  27. Here's my take... by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Some, maybe alot, are sincere. The rest put "Jedi" because there's no checkmark for "bugger off".

    --

    They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
  28. Re:why couldn't they just follow a normal religion by pherris · · Score: 2, Funny
    "Star Trek: The science fiction religion that doesn't take all your money."

    From the same episode of futurama.

    --
    "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
  29. Re:Significant sosiology phenomena by zakezuke · · Score: 4, Funny

    Charlton Heston, as Moses in the 10 Commandments. That bit where he parts the red sea is pretty damn spetacular. Definatly on par with yoda i'd say.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  30. Re:Ack, Damn Aussies always manage to get the cred by uncoveror · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Jedi religion didn't come from New Zealand. It began a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  31. Statistics Canada by earthforce_1 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I live in Canada, and it is a little known fact (even among Canadians) that failing to answer a Stats Can survey can net you a lengthy jail term. Don't believe me?

    From the statistics act: http://www.statcan.ca/english/about/statact.htm

    False or unlawful information

    31. Every person who, without lawful excuse,

    (a) refuses or neglects to answer, or wilfully answers falsely, any question requisite for obtaining any information sought in respect of the objects of this Act or pertinent thereto that has been asked of him by any person employed or deemed to be employed under this Act, or

    (b) refuses or neglects to furnish any information or to fill in to the best of his knowledge and belief any schedule or form that the person has been required to fill in, and to return the same when and as required of him pursuant to this Act, or knowingly gives false or misleading information or practises any other deception thereunder

    is, for every refusal or neglect, or false answer or deception, guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both. 1970-71-72, c. 15, s. 29.

    I think this was a subtle form of protest. You should see the stuff I told them the last time they chose me. My NYT mandatory registration lists me as a 13 year old lawyer from Afghanistan who makes USD $150,000 a year. Let's see what the marketing Noobs make of that one, LOL... And I resent the government doing this sort of thing even more. BTW, even though they don't identify individuals, localized statistical data is available right down to your postal code, which is a tax subsidized godsend to direct marketing agencies.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
  32. That's nothing by CGP314 · · Score: 2, Informative
  33. The force is weak with this one by hayden · · Score: 3, Funny
    20,000 on a population of 31 million? Pfft. Australia managed 70,000 on a population of 18 million. Which proves either:

    1. There's more freaky people with no life in Australia.
    2. Australians are more likely to take the piss out of something they think is stupid or pointless.

    --
    Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
  34. Jedi rights. by Recovery1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was listening to the radio the other day with a commentary by a radio host. He was referring to the fact that in this country, minority groups seem to have more rights and privledges then the rest of us. Examples that come to mind are the french. They are a big minority in Canada now ( think Chinese is now the second most populous language spoken here now), yet everything has to be labelled to satisfy french speakers. Native Americans have tax breaks, and so on.

    If I was one of the Jedi religion (which I admit I labelled my religion as "none of your business") I would start making as much noise as these other minoity groups. At the very least you can get laws made to wear your uniform and a lightsaber to work.

  35. where do they find teachers? by dorjelorand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    OK, I'm late enough that probably no one will see this comment, let alone mod it up, but what the heck ...

    In the Star Wars movies, the method for becoming a Jedi was to meet one and train under him (or her?). How does anyone outside of the movies do this? Have you ever met an actual Jedi Master?

    I am both a disciple and a teacher in one of the traditions Lucas imitated when he wrote ANH. For the record, Kadampa Buddhism, which was practiced in Tibet until recently. If someone comes up to me and tells me they are a Kadampa, but they have never met a Kadampa before and have never received teachings directly, I know they are mistaken. This is a tradition that must be passed on person-to-person. I always thought Jedi was too.

    Or maybe I'm just taking this way too seriously ...

    Wangden

    --
    -- "You're not fooling me, young man - it's turtles all the way down!"
  36. The force is strong with this one... by Charcharodon · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Why not, when every I fill out all the "mandatory" information I purposely put in erroneous info, because it's none of their damn business. There's got to be a couple of hundred profiles out their on me.

    I'm anywhere from 11 to 80 years of age, with my birthday falling between Jan 1 and Dec 30, and tend to make over $100,000 every year as an unemployed home maker that specializes in a technical career field. I am of multiple genders, races, and religions. I always live at 1234 Somewhere Ave. My phone number is 911-123-4567 feel free to call day or night. Now of course if it's for something important like pre-ordering Star Wars Galaxies (ok so I'm a nerd get over it), I tend to be honest enough with my info to get my credit card approved, but nothing more.

  37. I would like to know... by rediguana · · Score: 2, Insightful

    how they could prove that an individual who puts Jedi on the form does not believe in the faith, and hence lied, and should be fined? Sure it might not be a 'recognised' religion but authorities can't prove that it is not a religion, any less than they can prove other religions actually are real!

  38. Atheists on the Rise by SubtleNuance · · Score: 2, Informative

    The most significant element of this release, and the greatest hope I have for my country, is that the people who report "no-religion" exploded from 12% to 16%, making "no-religion" the 2nd largest group (RC was mid40s).

    see here for a synopsis @ statcan

  39. There's a .org website for Jediism by way2muchsense · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.jediism.org/

    I suppose that makes them legit.

  40. I told the census takers.... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2, Funny

    That my religious affiliation was "Elbonian". Alternatively, you could say you're Izzian or Izbian.

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  41. Religion as entertainment... by DrCode · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I agree that it sounds fairly goofy that people are claiming to follow the Jedi 'religion'. But I've thought that it's possible that other, mainstream, religions may have started in similar ways.

    Look at the Greek 'myths'; they're really good stories. Maybe they started purely as stories, and that it was only over several generations that people started to accept them as real.

  42. Re:I think you missed his point by japhmi · · Score: 2, Funny

    Getting married will kill your sexlife 9 times out of 10. The one guy is the lucky bastard :)

    Hey, my parents were married when I was conceived!

    --
    "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke