|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Guy Page
A new poll released from the University of New Hampshire Survey Center reveals a sharp divide between the private beliefs of Vermonters and their desire for religion to remain absent from the public sphere.
According to the March 2026 Green Mountain State Poll, while many residents still hold personal spiritual beliefs, a significant majority now identify as non-religious and favor a strict separation between church and state.
Generational shift in attendance
The poll highlights a dramatic decline in religious participation over time. While 77% of Vermont adults attended religious services at least a few times a year during their childhood, that number has plummeted in adulthood.
Currently, 67% of Vermonters report they never attend religious services, with only 9% attending weekly or more.
Overall, 62% of the state’s residents say they attend services less often now than they did as children.
This shift is reflected in the state’s religious makeup. Nearly half of the population now identifies as agnostic (14%), atheist (16%), or religiously unaffiliated (16%). Both Roman Catholics and Protestants now represent just 18% of the population each.
Spiritual beliefs persist despite low attendance
Despite the lack of formal religious engagement, spiritual belief has not vanished from the Green Mountain State. The survey found that 50% of Vermonters definitely or probably believe in God or a supernatural entity.
Additionally, 46% believe in heaven or some form of supernatural afterlife.
Views on human origins are also varied: 52% of residents believe humans evolved without divine intervention, while 31% believe evolution occurred with a role played by a supernatural entity.
Keeping faith out of politics and schools
The most striking findings of the poll concern the role of religion in public life. An overwhelming 82% of Vermonters agree that religious institutions are too concerned with money and power.
This skepticism extends to the intersection of faith and governance, with 71% of residents stating that religion should play no role in public affairs whatsoever.
On the topic of religious leadership in politics, 59% of respondents believe it is inappropriate for clergy to endorse political candidates.
Vermonters are also largely opposed to religious practices in the classroom; 62% believe it is inappropriate for public school teachers to lead classes in prayers referring to Jesus, and 61% feel the same about general prayers to a non-specific God.
A stark political divide
The data reveals that views on religion are heavily influenced by political affiliation. While 64% of Republicans say religion is very or somewhat important in their lives, 68% of Democrats and 57% of Independents say it is not important.
Similarly, 80% of Democrats view school prayer as inappropriate, compared to a 51% majority of Republicans who believe it is appropriate.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Religion
Looks like communist indoctrination is compete, we will most likely see what is happening in Europe with bans on any form of public religious display except call to prayer speakers, we already have those, local Government funded in NYC
And this is why BenFranklin commented that our republic would only work for a God-fearing people. And as you can see, he was entirely correct. The complete absence of a moral compass is a hallmark of the modern Left.
So, transgender reading in public schools is fine and religion is off the table….
Give me a F****ng break!
We can start by claiming what we DO agree on;
“Thou shall Not Kill (murder)”
Shouldn’t all Americans celebrate the separation of church and state?
Regardless of political alignment, race or religion.
Perhaps you could kindly point out to us where exactly that’s in our Constitution.
DJC, the establishment clause is literally in the first amendment. If you are looking for the specific phrase because you’re being obstinate, Thomas Jefferson first referred to it in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 when he referred to a “a wall of separation between Church & State”. If you want to pretend that it doesn’t exist, or that centuries of precedent of law aren’t based on it, then you are really, really wrong. Of course, you’ve never really read the Constitution either, otherwise you wouldn’t support Donald Trump.
But the Establishment Clause does not call for a separation of church and state, it says Congress shall make no law establishing a national religion. Was based on what happened with Henry VIII and Oliver Cromwell in England
Chris,
A letter is not a ratified governmental document.
Me thinks that Vermont has it backwards.
Our founders did not want state involved in church or religion.
We didn’t want a theocracy!
Does anyone remember the reformation?
Theocracy? Islam? Sharia law? Hello??????
Now government is the church!
Speak against the Marxist faith and you will be persecuted! Speak against the dogma and be canceled, hell we might not burn you at the stake like the folks in flatlander Salem, but we’ll cancel your but as a bus driver, as a school principle, as a business, as a friend and as family at thanksgiving!
We have a Marxist theocracy ruining Vermont, a perfectly good republic.
What ever you do don’t read any friggin books and see the greatest act of love, and know Jesus. Might alter your view so self perfection, and pride that i am
God, I am Marxist, hear me roar, see me protest!
We are completely lost, LORD, please have mercy on us, we know not what we a doing.
To Chris Cos – nice try – I swore an oath to uphold & defend the Constitution from people like you for two and a half decades.
God is mentioned 4 times in the Declaration of Independence
Ok
God is mentioned zero times in the US Constitution.
Wrong, David.
God is referenced at least four times in the U.S. Constitution. Here’s one…
“in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven…”
No Tom, God is not referenced at least four times in the U.S. Constitution.
Article VII is the only place mentioning “Lord” (Jesus), though this is considered a standard dating convention rather than a theological statement.
Wrong-again-David
Dating documents to “the Year of our Lord” had become more unusual by 1787.
The Declaration of Independence for instance, simply states “In Congress, July 4, 1776.”
The language used in the Constitution is significant.
Using “The Year of our Lord” in the Constitution places the document in the context of the religious traditions of Western civilization.
When ‘you people’ don’t like the truth as it is… you’ll either just outright lie or contort the truth and/or reality to fit your Marxist worldview.
Well Tom,
As I originally said, “God” specifically is mentioned zero times in the US Constitution.
And the phrase “in the Year of our Lord” in the U.S. Constitution is generally considered to have no significant legal, theological, or religious value regarding the founding of the United States, according to numerous historical and legal analyses.
Bonus fact:
While it is the only mention of a divine concept(again, not God) in the document, it is not part of the active, ratified legal text itself. Interesting…
And please revaluate your finger pointing Marxist accusations. Those types of lazy presumptions add nothing to an otherwise constructive discourse.
“Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” – Genesis 3:1
David, your ilk and you are like the serpent.
You purposely and adroitly change and contort language to confuse and distort.
God is referenced at least four times in the U.S. Constitution, if not six times.
But then you change the language to state that the actual word God does not appear in the Constitution, a claim that I never asserted.
Your ilk and you disdain being under the rule of a God, and you’ll do anything to discredit this.
Tom,
I was raised in the Catholic community, married in a Catholic church and still attend mass weekly. Your presumptions are lazy and misguided.
And you keep mentioning the four(now six) references to god in the constitution. What and where are they specifically??
Until that’s answered, here’s this: https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2007/09/god-and-constitution-under-remembered-controversy
In the event reading comprehension is difficult, the first amendment of the constitution provides the people with the right to practice & exercise their right to religious affiliation and that there can be no specific state-sponsored religion imposed.
Nowhere in the constitution does it demand “separation” between the state & religion – this has been affirmed a number of times by the SCOTUS numerous times over time.
And no, stating the same untruth over & over does not cause the masses to believe it as truth, sorry Alinsky fans such as Cox.
Should we wipe the word God off the federally issued money that everyone clamors to get?
Probably
Google AI: Separation of church and state is the constitutional principle, enshrined in the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, that keeps government and religious institutions distinct and independent. It prohibits the government from establishing an official religion, favoring one faith over another, or unduly interfering with religious practice.
Freedom Forum
Google – an impeccable reference 🤪
Religion has been the cause of more wars and human suffering than any other factor. Keep religion private and out of the public arena.
Fixed:
Man has been the cause of more wars and human suffering than any other factor. Keep man private and out of the public arena.
The encyclopedia of wars says 6.6% of wars were caused by religion.
Unfortunately, Google AI (and most AI I’ve tested) are extremely biased against religion having had any role in history or society and biased towards a communist ideological frame of reference. It can not be trusted to provide accurate answers. In one case, I was even able to corner the AI after a series of questions in a logical fallacy. When asked to store the new finding for future use, it simply said “I am not programmed to acquire new findings, only to provide the answers I was programmed with”
Yes AI is not to be trusted. Thankfully we have those that are truly educated professionals in their field of study to provide us with the relevant information and examples we require.
For example, here is an excerpt from “The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness” written by two experts in American History and Government.
“The U.S. Constitution, drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1788, is a godless document. Its utter neglect of religion was no oversight; it was apparent to all. Self-consciously designed to be an instrument with which to structure the secular politics of individual interest and happiness, the Constitution was bitterly attacked for its failure to mention God or Christianity. Our history books usually describe in great detail the major arguments made against the federal Constitution by its Anti-Federalist opponents: it meant death to the states and introduced an elitist Senate and a monarchical presidency. [History texts] seldom mention, however, the concerted campaign to discredit the Constitution as irreligious, which for many of its opponents was its principal flaw. It is as if recognizing the dimension of this criticism would draw too much attention to what was being attacked — the secularism of the Constitution. In fact, this undocumented and under-remembered controversy of 1787-88 over the godless Constitution was one of the most important public debates ever held in America over the place of religion in politics. The advocates of a secular state won, and it is their Constitution we revere today.”
AI is programmed to think logically, so its no wonder it doesn’t like religion. People have been using logic to poke holes in religion since the Epicurean Paradox 2,000 years ago.
David,
Yes, by all means trust the “experts”.
How many masks are you wearing?
How many “boosters” are circulating in your Body?
Pediatricians were paid based on the PERCENTAGE of their patients who were vax*ed, so they kicked people who declined the v*x from their practices in order to juice their numbers and their pharma bonuses.
“Experts”. Sure…
I would like to know the numbers of these polls. They never tell you that. I could do a poll of anything and come up with results that I want !
The first sentence of this very article contains a direct link to the poll results featuring all the numbers you could ever ask for.
Maybe if people would stop being religious and experience a life changing RELATIONSHIP with Jesus Christ everything would change starting with your life and Prayer, there is Power in Prayer and Power in the Mighty Name of Jesus Christ. Those two together have amazing results.
“all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
No Creator, no rights.
No sale.
Jefferson was known to be quite intentional about his word choice, so his insertion of the terms, “Nature’s God” and “their Creator” rather than something more explicitly religious like “Our God” was without a doubt intentional. And given what else we know about Jefferson, he likely hoped that this sensibility would translate for a general populace and grant a sort of secular air to the Revolution. But he was not insensible to the religious character of many of his countrymen, so using an intentionally vague term like “Creator” could satisfy any Christian, Quaker, Jew, or Deist who read it.
Even the most ardent secularist receives natural rights at birth. Atheists too!
Jefferson was known to be quite intentional about his word choice, so his insertion of the terms, “Nature’s God” and “their Creator” rather than something more explicitly religious like “Our God” was without a doubt intentional. And given what else we know about Jefferson, he likely hoped that this sensibility would translate for a general populace and grant a sort of secular air to the Revolution. But he was not insensible to the religious character of many of his countrymen, so using an intentionally vague term like “Creator” could satisfy any Christian, Quaker, Jew, or Deist who read it.
Even the most ardent secularist receives natural rights at birth. Atheists too!
Non-believers have always been among us.. That being said, they can practice whatever they want EXCEPT : Do not get in my way about practicing my
Christian beliefs, as I have ever since I was a kid back in the 40’s. Respect is sometimes lost in today’s world, just let those of us who are of Judeo-Christian heritage , carry on, and other beliefs will be respected as well.
It would nice if the “no religion” concept was equally observed, evolution being a prime example. Evolution poses as science, but is not truly scientifically provable: Observable, Testable, Repeatable. There is huge variation of opinion regarding evolution among real scientists. Evolution as it is commonly taught is more akin to a religion than it is an established fact. It takes a lot of “faith” to believe the claims of evolution.
You don’t believe in evolution lol? You know the monkey won the Snopes trial right?
According to tonight news (that’s Good Friday night news) there’s a well documented huge resurgence of faith in young people coming back to the Church across the country!!! A lot of those people felt something was missing in their lives and they needed Christ to complete them. It’s bringing families back generated by GenZ. The power of faith-it’s amazing. And you’re saying Vermont is still behind the 8 ball sucking hind tit? That sounds like Vermont but I wouldn’t count her out. Vermont has still always loved God and freedom over oppression.
Would that be one of your distant relatives chris?
It would be, but then again I made it past the sixth grade. Hey DJ, do you think that Artemis is fake too? Lol
Congress shall make NO law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
Period.
Yes Bruce, you are correct, as that is stated in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
However, the Supreme Court has historically ruled that while religious beliefs are absolutely protected, religious actions or practices may be restricted if they conflict with compelling public interests or safety.
Church bells are ringing, time to go!!