The UK Census form and Putting down "Jedi"

This particular post is inspired by this absurdly inaccurate, willfully misleading article on "The Escapist" website entitled UK Atheists Hope to Eliminate Jedi Population and the comments that were shit out in front of me in response to it.

First of all, most importantly; the title. Sensationalism in journalism is well known and well mocked (yet still well believed), as brilliantly shown in this SMBC comic, and yet the title of this piece is more ridiculous than others' satire of it. It seems to imply that Atheists are openly campaigning for genocide based on beliefs and, whilst many a-fool likely believe that this is something atheists have always secretly wanted to do, the actual truth of the campaign couldn't be further from this bizarre title.

One commenter (one of the aforementioned fools) exclaimed "No wonder nobody likes atheists!". Yes! No wonder nobody does; The press will lie through their teeth to make us seem like baby killers and you eat it up like it's made of chocolate and tits.

A far more accurate title, though unfortunately less exciting, would be "UK Atheists campaign for accuracy on the census form".

Yes everyone had a good joke in 2001 putting down "Jedi" in the optional religion question, the common reasons listed for doing so being - entertainment, trolling and protesting the inclusion of an optional question on religion.

But census information is important, you don't lie about the rest of the questions and there is simply no reason, beyond being an asstroll, for lying on the census form. The government uses this information to shape its policy and inaccurate information gives an inaccurate representation of the population.

And let me just hammer home the big point about the "protest" angle; ITS FUCKING OPTIONAL. What? Are you so disgusted by your own beliefs that the government isn't even allowed to ask what they are? Are you so childish and dimwitted in seeing that a more poignant protest would be to simply not answer the question? But no! Some intrepid imbeciles on the escapist are under the impression that the government is "Prying into their personal lives", and seeing as this objection arose a fair few times I'm going to have to assume this is a somewhat common thought.

If you are one of those who thinks that asking an optional question is, in any way, prying into your private life, then you are officially fucking paranoid. According to your way of thinking it is possible for the government to pry into your private life through a single question without you even answering it. That's some spectacular stupid you've got there.

And lets get this straight - The campaign is for accuracy. Accuracy, not the eradication of the "Jedi" answer. If you're really a Jedi, if you really do identify to that religion, then put down "Jedi".

If you're doing it to be amusing, if you're doing it to "Protest", if you're doing it because you think it makes you some sort of rebel right out of Grease; Don't. Put down the option that accurately describes you...or don't put down anything at all.

Please

Objective Morality - Why God isn't Objective

It is often said, by professors of more "Sophisticated" theology and apologetics, that God provides us with an objective morality and that without it we are unable to condemn any action as being immoral or moral. It does not take long after this statement is made for the Godwin's to start piling up, for Slippery slopes of the most well lubricated variety to burst forth from the ground like weeds, proclaiming that without an objective morality babies would be tortured in the streets and that no argument could ever be presented for the aforementioned actions immorality; Morals are just opinions, subjective, "untouchable".

Now, I'm not writing this post to demolish the flawed, unreasoned, emotionally driven argument found in the Argument from Morality; Such has been done before, by people far more eloquent and intelligent than myself. No, this post is being written because every time I see this argument brought up in a debate I often wonder why, in my opinion, the "base" of the argument is always granted by the opposing (often atheist) side.

Why is it given as granted that God even can be a source of Objective morality? Let alone the copious amounts of flaws that follow.

Whilst there is no universally accepted definition of what "Objective" is, the most common and well accepted definition is that, for something to be objectively true or false, the statement must be true or false "Mind-independent". That its truth is not Dependant on bias, personal feelings, or the existence of a conscious being.

But is God not described as a mind? Does God not have feelings? Emotions? Is God not a sentient, conscious entity? Every description of God I've ever heard, from the most fundamental right wing version of "God" to the most wishy washy left wing version, From Judaism to Mormonism, God is and has all of those things.

And thus I propose what God's morality would truly be; Subjective, but imposed. God's morality is, in fact, no less subjective than yours or mine, It is formed in the mind of God, through Gods personal feelings and biases, and then imposed on by this celestial dictator.

Even in a universe ruled by God(s), Morality would still not be Objective.