Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By ticking a box in privacy,the people will not reveal their sexual orientation ,thus they will have the freedom to divulge that sensitive private information.
The material with the individual data can be destroyed afterwards,so no record will exist of each person's orientation. The government will not keep records on who is what...
With such measures,we can have a fairly reliable sensus with indisputable results.
It will help the cause of freedom ,justice & non-discrimination. It will also dissolve all inaccurate suggestions on homosexuality...
There were questions to suggest orientation on the 2000 Census, and there was very serious debate within the gay community as to whether to answer them honestly. The substantial "NO!" bloc was a guaranty that gays would be undercounted. There is no reason to suspect that things would be different in 2010, and more to the point, Census is dropping the long-form, and bringing the short-form more into conformance with the American Community Survey form. There isn't room on the form even for the questions that have typically been asked in the past...
There were questions to suggest orientation on the 2000 Census, and there was very serious debate within the gay community as to whether to answer them honestly. The substantial "NO!" bloc was a guaranty that gays would be undercounted. There is no reason to suspect that things would be different in 2010, and more to the point, Census is dropping the long-form, and bringing the short-form more into conformance with the American Community Survey form. There isn't room on the form even for the questions that have typically been asked in the past...
Can you enlighten me as to why there is not enough room?
Perhaps reread the parts before the part you bolded. That was the explanation. Short form only...more conformance with the ACS. Last I saw, questions on foster relationships were out for 2010...another victim of the battle for newly limited real estate...
There were questions to suggest orientation on the 2000 Census, and there was very serious debate within the gay community as to whether to answer them honestly. The substantial "NO!" bloc was a guaranty that gays would be undercounted.
That's an interesting point. I wonder whether the Census Bureau takes into account the fact that many people don't answer some questions, or answer them dishonestly.
Maybe they should just ask everyone: "Gettin' any?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
