RELIGIOUS PARTICIPATION IN AMERICA REMAINS STAGNANT …
Do you believe? Or as they say in the South, “are you religious?”
Most don’t. Or aren’t. And if you believe the pollsters, they haven’t been for some time – at least not in connection with any organized faith.
According to Gallup’s most recent data, religious participation in America (i.e. the number of Americans who say they attended a “church, synagogue or mosque” within the prior week) stood at 39 percent in 2013 – down from 42 percent in 2009.
This metric – which most researchers believe to be slightly overstated by respondents – has nonetheless remained remarkable constant over the past half century. After topping out at 49 percent in 1955 (and again in 1958), religious participation plunged to 40 percent by the early 1970s.
Since then it hasn’t climbed above 44 percent (or dropped below 37 percent).
Take a look …
(Click to enlarge)
Overall, 41 percent of Americans described themselves as “very religious” according to Gallup – meaning they regularly attend worship services and identify religion as an important part of their daily lives. Twenty-nine percent defined themselves as “nonreligious,” while another 29 percent identified themselves as “moderately religious.”
Not surprisingly broad discrepancies exist between states. In Mississippi, 61 percent of residents described themselves as “very religious,” compared to only 22 percent in Vermont. Early-voting South Carolina ranked No. 5 among the “most religious” states – with 54 percent of residents describing themselves as “very religious.”
Vermont’s neighbor – early-voting New Hampshire – was the second-least religious state in America at 24 percent, which should make for a delicate balancing act when prospective 2016 presidential candidates start courting votes.
Interesting …
Where are you on the subject of religion? Vote in our poll and post your thoughts in our comments section below …
92 comments
Hmmm…”2009″ …what is significant about that year???? …..Remember the dust up when it was pointed out that Obama, since leaving Rev. Wright’s BLT cult in Chicago, does not attend a church or a mosque???…That was 2010.
As a leader, it seems this is just another example of Obama’s failure…and Americans paying for his inability to lead…Sad…
Are you an authority on Christian beliefs, or Christian behavior?
Enquiring minds want to know.
No, God is the ultimate authority. I’m just one of God’s sinful and humble creatures….
I’m more humble than you are.
That’s like saying banker is a little more honest than a lawyer.
or like saying there’s a difference between sane and insane.
Nah.
Put a point in the middle, and start moving down that line in two different directions. You’ll find Damned Tango on the “insane” side, about halfway down.
If anyone knows hyperbole, it’s you, and I defer to your expertise.
That’s right kindly of you, neighbor.
You should have included a category in the poll, “spiritual, but not religious”. That means that you are aware that there is life after death, maybe (or probably) a creator or superior being or beings, but you don’t subscribe to the hokum propagated by most “religions” about being “the one true way”, “the only way”, and other drivel.
His polls are always 2D.
I think everyone will be surprised by what they find after they die.
I think everyone would be surprised at what they would find if they just lived.
I think everyone will be incapable of being surprised after they die. It’s hard to form thoughts when you no longer exist.
when the body dies the soul lives.
Ha! do you believe?
*what* do you believe? Is more the question… most people have no idea whatsoever what Jesus said or stood for… much less what his vision (or Paul’s for that matter) of the Christian “church” was.
And “religion” is something Jesus had nothing but disgust for… ironically, you only cast it in terms that are completely irrelevant. The entire chapter of Matthew 23 is dedicated to the ire that Jesus felt for “religion.”
I believe I’ll have another beer.
:-)
Now *that’s* a belief to be *respected*!
I’ll join you!!! I LOVE to toss back a few frothies!!
I believe I’ll have another beer.
Every man should believe in something.
Then Jesus hates Liberalism…but there is NO question that Liberalism is a Religion…
Liberalism dictates its followers blindly believe in Man-made Global Warming, debilitating Racism against Blacks and Darwin Evolution when so much evidence is to the contrary. And you FORCE your ridiculous beliefs on others, like the Muslim religion wishes to do…
liberals care about people – Republicans care about money… period. Republicans are nothing but a smoke screen for the ultra rich.
Liberals care about people.
Conservatives want results that actually help people.
Conservatives want results that fatten their pocket book… even if it means giving away the country to the ultra rich.
You’re an example of what is wrong with politics in our country. Both sides do it. Demonize the opposing side. You and GT have a lot in common.
Yes we do… Damned Tango and I both live in the same America… although I don’t think the America Damned Tango lives in exists, ever did, or ever will.
Are you Jesus? Am l your enemy?
I’m supposed to be like Jesus… and the enemy is within…. Republicans.
Actually, he beat the crap out of them, one time for sure.
Yep… and he did it without hurting the people they were controlling while he was at it… a blast of light like a hydrogen bomb, spreading outwards into history…. lighting up the rotten little dungeons and damp holes where people weep in misery… giving hope that leads to an abundant life for free.
Amen!
No: He’s demonizing the side that actually achieves results…and exalting the demons who are the epitome of failure and collapse……
Amen!!!
There are good and bad in both parties.
Those who publicly profess their religion and then do the Devil’s work behind the scenes:
Bill Clinton
Anthony Weiner
Randy Halfacre
Bob Peeler
Richard Eckstrom
Barak Obama
Bobby Harrell
Nikki Haley
Ted Vick
Harvey Peeler
Mark Sanford
Hugh Leatherman
Ken Ard
Just to name a few.
NSA sees a list like that and they start to get nervous, start wonderin’. Next thing you know you’re sitting in a dark room with voices yelling at you “what were you going to do with that list!”. Sharing could be hazardous to your freedom.
Liberals care about their own greed and power. They use OUR money to pay off those who vote them in…
Again: Liberalism is a RELIGION…Glad you did not try to deny that…
Any: why are so many people suffering so much more, on food stamps and welfare, w/ less healthcare under the most-liberal of presidents…
Conservatives understand you must attend to you and your family first, then you help others..and it works fine.
W/o producers, the non-contributing have nothing. And the liberals can only rob from the workers for so long, to feed those that empower them and feed their creed…
all that dogmatic shit is religion… it doesn’t get anyone anywhere… it’s just an excuse to PUT God on your side.
You are denouncing Liberalism as Dogma, GREAT!!!!…you finally learned something from all that I’ve pounded into your thick, liberal skull…
More people have health insurance and health care coverage under Obama than under Bush. Lies can’t change truth, but you are if nothing else an accomplished liar.
And you are no producer.
I beg to differ…GT produces more hot air than Limbaugh’s blow up doll. Where is he, BTW? Doing the Lawd’s work??
We could feed the entire world if we took enough money from everyone in the US Tom, why don’t we do it?
We have enough sorry, shiftless assholes to take care of in thls country without taking on the world. You liberals are out of it.
You just partially made my point!
It’s not just that some people don’t deserve help, it’s that it would bankrupt us!
So in essence, the argument being ‘made’ is that we should help some people arbitrarily and that taking stuff from people doesn’t matter.
The whole thing is sick.
With Medicaid, and indigent care hospitals…EVERYBODY and EVERYONE had healthcare under Bush, you ignorant LIAR and blithering idiot…
It was poorly managed, and too costly beforehand, but Obamcare is only making it MORE Expensive, and less efficient, and less effective….and eventually unsustainable….
Waiting for the day you pull a Mother Teresa in Calcutta to show us how much you care, I’m sure I’ll be waiting for ever.
It’s all a matter of degrees.
To quote Penn Jillette:
“It’s amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness.
People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered, and if we’re compassionate we’ll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint.”
gunpoint
——
perfect.
Try not paying your taxes, it eventually it ends at gunpoint. No sense in whitewashing it.
As much as Buffett decries the injustice of the tax system, I have yet to hear about him checking the gov’t donation box on his tax form. In fact, I have yet to meet someone that has done so regardless of the partisan paradigm.
Try not paying your taxes, it eventually it ends at gunpoint. No sense in whitewashing it.
——–
“men with guns”… I know the drill.
As much as Buffett decries the injustice of the tax system, I have yet to hear about him checking the gov’t donation box on his tax form. In fact, I have yet to meet someone that has done so regardless of the partisan paradigm.
——
shocking isn’t it? Without speed signs, people would drive at a safe speed because it’s in their best interest to do so… wouldn’t they?
“Without speed signs, people would drive at a safe speed because it’s in their best interest to do so… wouldn’t they?”
I’ve been to a lot of S. American countries with exactly that, it’s not perfect(because people aren’t perfect), but it’s amazing how well traffic flows with no signs, lights, etc.
Some would consider it “backwards”, I understand that, but I wouldn’t be so quick to cheer on regimentation of even our most basic activities. You are operating within the current paradigm and it’s hard to see outside of it.
I know, I know….I’m wasting my breath…but sometimes I try anyway.
I’ve been to a lot of S. American countries with exactly that, it’s not perfect(because people aren’t perfect), but it’s amazing how well traffic flows with no signs, lights, etc.
——-
how well? Like the Autobahn? Yeah… that worked *real* well. :)
Some would consider it “backwards”, I understand that, but I wouldn’t be so quick to cheer on regimentation of even our most basic activities. You are operating within the current paradigm and it’s hard to see outside of it.
——
I see the Gaussian curve of intelligence, and I know for a fact that many people are like wild animals, held in check by that regimentation. Laws aren’t an artificial layer with no useful application – they are a genetic necessity.
I know, I know….I’m wasting my breath…but sometimes I try anyway.
——-
I know… a lot of our insights came from the playboy under the mattress, and the few times we scored alcohol or marijuana… proving our parents were full of shit… and it’s your duty to help teens everywhere break out of their cocoon just like you did.
Keep it up… maybe you’ll make money out of the rat race by writing persuasive hit pieces in a libertarian blog… and on the way, feel just the tiniest bit altruistic by occasionally being honest with unappreciative hacks like me…. never realizing that altruism is your worst enemy, and the reason anarchists can’t organize.
“never realizing that altruism is your worst enemy, and the reason anarchists can’t organize.”
Regardless of philosophy there will always be organization, they question is whether it will be under voluntary terms or not.
“Laws aren’t an artificial layer with no useful application – they are a genetic necessity.”
I’m not arguing against laws, I’m arguing for the philosophy that would determine how they are accepted and enforced.(and yes, that might include guns)
The current philosophy start with taking something from someone, which is not a good place, aside from the method by which “law” is both passed and administered is faulty much of the time.
I’m sorry you took offense to my last statement, I can see how, so I’m just going to ignore all the marijuana/rebellion yada yada yada generalization bullshit, it doesn’t add to the discussion.
“never realizing that altruism is your worst enemy, and the reason anarchists can’t organize.”
Regardless of philosophy there will always be organization, they question is whether it will be under voluntary terms or not.
——–
voluntary? Sounds like a contradiction – how can law be voluntary? We can’t be talking about Otis locking himself in jail after the bar lets out. Perhaps you are talking about “degrees” of volition?
“Laws aren’t an artificial layer with no useful application – they are a genetic necessity.”
I’m not arguing against laws, I’m arguing for the philosophy that would determine how they are accepted and enforced.(and yes, that might include guns)
———-
If you’re talking about it, I missed it. Care to elaborate?
The current philosophy start with taking something from someone, which is not a good place, aside from the method by which “law” is both passed and administered is faulty much of the time.
——-
I can’t really contrast your hypothetical without a complete hypothetical, now can I? Is this a game of some kind? How about putting your cards on the table.
I’m sorry you took offense to my last statement, I can see how, so I’m just going to ignore all the marijuana/rebellion yada yada yada generalization bullshit, it doesn’t add to the discussion.
——
I thought I was cutting to the chase. We’ll get to the benefits eventually, I guess.
“voluntary? Sounds like a contradiction – how can law be voluntary? We
can’t be talking about Otis locking himself in jail after the bar lets
out. Perhaps you are talking about “degrees” of volition?”
See, it’s your hyperbole that makes me really not want to get into it. Regardless, no it’s the acceptance of explicit terms. Like the non aggression principle for example.
Everyone blathers on about the “social contract” because inherently they know they need some nebulous justification for control because the divine right of kings isn’t cutting it in most places anymore.
“If you’re talking about it, I missed it. Care to elaborate?”
We didn’t get that far(now we are).
“How about putting your cards on the table.”
It’s very simple, you start with the non aggression principle and property rights, the foundation of civil society-and move from there. You have to presuppose that people are allowed to keep their stuff and that agressing against them is wrong.
It’s very simple, you start with the non aggression principle and property rights, the foundation of civil society-and move from there. You have to presuppose that people are allowed to keep their stuff and that agressing against them is wrong.
——–
I see… you just non aggress the whole thing.
Pretty much. If you can’t get people to not aggress(word?), then what everyone is doing is bitching about what levels of aggression are kosher.
As insane as it sounds, that is currently the accepted paradigm.
It’s why after the secession the whole thing went wrong in trying to figure out how to pay off the war debts, Shay’s Rebellion, Penn. liquor tax, etc.
The Revolutionaries just got done putting everything on the line to get out of taxes(“without representation”) and couldn’t believe that now that had to pony up to the local lords.
Anyway, that’s gist of it. Don’t bonk people over the head, don’t take their shit, yada yada yada. It seems like common sense…but because people can’t see any way to pay for roads, think gov’t should help the poor, etc. et al you’re pretty much considered a kook if you propose it.
you’re pretty much considered a kook if you propose it.
——-
no offense, but uh… well, you know.
lol, no offense taken, from one kook to another
:)
Although, I’m at least a kook with an argument.
Today, being a kook is an asset.
Without speed signs, people would drive at a safe speed because it’s in their best interest to do so… wouldn’t they?
For the most part…yes.
That’s why municipalities with arbitrarily low limits are called “speed traps”.
Without speed signs, people would drive at a safe speed because it’s in their best interest to do so… wouldn’t they?
For the most part…yes.
———
oh you!
Ask any auto insurance agent. They know driving habits and how people react safely in dangerous situations. That reaction to avoid collisions is their moneymaker.
As for “safe speed”, one speed for all vehicles is provably retarded.
Unfortunately, I want to develop a relationship with you to play chess occasionally – otherwise, I’d give you the business end of a scorched earth screed on libertarian ideas. :)
As a libertarian, you know I’d prefer the business end to the government end!
50 years of that and what has it got us other than more debt. You liberals need to get off your asses and help pull the wagon.
And you are still buying that liberal mantra?
it’s only a mantra if you don’t understand it.
Ok, interesting math in the poll, also!
… MODERATELY RELIGIOUS (43%, 6 Votes)
… VERY RELIGIOUS (29%, 4 Votes)
… NONRELIGIOUS (28%, 4 Votes
How is it that “4 Votes” for Very Religious equals 29% and “4 Votes” for Nonreligious equals 28%? Is the poll slated just a bit?
Mathematical programming issue. Actual numbers are 42.857% moderate, 28.571% for Very and Non. Since it’s rounded for display purposes one of the last two categories has to take a hit for rounding. Standard practice is to have the last one in order of choices take the hit, especially if you are showing total numbers. The assumption is that anyone reading it and seeing the numbers will figure out that it’s a rounding issue. Programmer logic 101.
Culture trumps strategy. It is all in my head.
I believe we have a so called Governor as the idiot in charge…another child dead in Greenville because of DSS failure again to make Haleys numbers look good for her bid of 4 more years of bilking out state. Thats what I believe…She is our Ohaley…
yawn, more trolls covering for decades of Dem rule and corruption in family services
You fucking idiot, this is S.C.
I believe my hardest erections were in church. One lady never wore a slip and would flash me her bush at the picnic table after service ended. Later that Summer she would be impressed with my hot steel.
The chart is really not bad. The only unusual change is the surge during the baby boom. It is not unusual that parents of small children attend at higher rates. This chart actually gave me some optimism.
It started pouring rain. We only had a very small umbrella with us. My nephew and I went under the umbrella. We started jumping over puddles. When we jumped to avoid stepping into a very large puddle, we were struck by lightening. My nephew and I were killed by the lightening. My nephew’s interior organs were completely burned, charred, but his exterior was left intact. He suffered cardiac arrest and he did not respond to the paramedics’ attempts to resuscitate him. The lightening burned me horribly. The lightening entered through my arm. It burned my breasts. My breasts were completely gone. It removed all of the flesh from my stomach and my reproductive organs. My legs were totally and completely charred, I mean completely. The lightening exited through my right foot.
I think I need Paul Harvey to come in at this point . . .
Some conclusions here. Mississippi and SC are among the “most religious” and also among the worst states to live in the US. Hmmmmm…you see where I’m going with this?
The more churches you have crammed into every square mile of real estate…the worse of a place it is to live.
Someone, I’m not sure who, said it best when referring to “clinging to guns and religion”…so true, so true.
The more churches you have crammed into every square mile of real estate…the worse of a place it is to live
…..or vice versa.
You might need to study the demographic patterns in America. You may find out you are a lot more stupid than the DNC, FITS and CNN tell you, you are…Hint: look at the shifts in Congressional numbers.
“I believe.. I believe.. It’s silly, but I believe.” – not just a quote from the 1947 version of Miracle on 34th Street.
Would anyone be careless to their neighbor, if they were always in clear sight of the torments of hell awaiting those who have treated them carelessly?
Everyone… just some more than others.
U2 was an interesting pick for the musical interlude. Check out this piece of a Bono interview: http://youtu.be/VIm7JRSo6w4
One of my favorite quotes of his (from a different interview) was, “…and I believe that Jesus was, you know, the Son of God. And I understand that … we need to be really, really respectful to people who find that ridiculous and … preposterous.”
Any discussion of this topic (especially here!) will certainly be lacking in the respect department, surely.
I have faith, and because of it, I’m always suspicious of people who profess to have faith.
I like science and math. I can believe things that are proven.
That doesn’t make me an Atheist, though. Doesn’t make me a Christian, either.
No, it makes you an agnostic.
is that good or bad?
Maybe it’s neither.
Yep
Do drugs count?
So you can attend church 51 weeks in a row, then miss a Sunday, and be considered not religious, if the pollster called you that week?
Sounds worthless to me.
living in SC counts as being in church basically, so we all attend 24/7.