Occasionally one runs up into things in other countries that are different from what one’s used to here in the US.
For example, in the US it is unthinkable to ask someone to put their religious affiliation on a government form, or in any sort of normal employment record. I was surprised, when we were expanding our HR system world-wide, that in Germany, for example, it was required to track religion on the HR record. The idea was that it was necessary to track to avoid (or detect) religious discrimination cases (similar to how in the US we store info on race, which isn’t allowed in most other countries).
I’m traveling to India on business next month, the first time in some years, so I’ve been doing an India visa application. And one of the questions is, “Religion,” which surprised me a bit …
… though there are historic reasons why it might be sought after, and (given the large number of questions as to whether I have Pakistani relatives, I suspect it might also subject my application to greater scrutiny for some answers).
Choices offered were:
BAHAI
BUDDHISM
CHRISTIAN
HINDU
ISLAM
OTHERS
PARSI
SIKH
ZORASTRIAN [sic]
Not the choices one would see in a similar demographic survey in the US, which was also interesting.
(For the record, I put “CHRISTIAN”.)
No profound conclusion here, just an observation that other folks don’t always do the same things that we do, and that our “normal” isn’t that of others.
Amusing that there isn’t a “none” or “no thank you” option.
@BD -That would be “OTHERS”.
Though that would be kind of an interesting idea. “Why, yes, I worship the OTHERS …”
European HR systems have to ask for religious affiliation because denominations get their government funding based on their percentage of the population. Even during the days of the wall, German churches got their $ from the government. At least, that’s what my German and Austrian friends tell me.
@Deb – It was explained to me (by Europeans) that today, from an HR/Employment standpoint, it’s to track diversity and/or avoid discrimination suits.
I’d think for funding that tying it to other governmental processes (e.g., taxes) would be a more efficient process, but there could be some basis to that.
During a phone survey about politics on Monday night, when asked my religious preference (which to me seems an odd way to ask that question), I said atheist. And then I was asked to spell it!
@Mary – “I before E, except after C, or in cases of A as in Neighbor and Weigh.” You Atheists break all the rules, don’t you?
@Mary – Actually, “religious preference” is kind of a nice way to put it. Makes it seem less monolithic and unchanging.
Just out of interest have you seen “Love Actually”? I wonder how many USians are confused by the school nativity play.
I’m completing a job application for the Civil Service. They ask for racial background, religeon and sexuality, so they can track diversity.
I think enough people here remember the nativity play, from personal experience and cultural references, to not be too confused. And many churches still have Christmas pageants, that basically (and more appropriately) do the same thing.
In the states, the government tracks gender and race to encourage / enforce employment diversity — and forbids employers asking about age and religion for the same reason. (I’ve not heard of employers directly asking for sexual orientation — it’s forbidden in some jurisdictions, and not in others.)
Dave, so would the “OTHERS” be the Weeping Angels or the Silence?
@bd – I was thinking of something more Non-Euclidean and Squamous, but that’s the fun of the idea.