France, Britain and Australia are no longer Christian-majority countries, Muslim population has increased by..., number of Islamic countries has...
Christian population: A major demographic shift is underway across the world due to a multitude of factors such as wars, illegal immigration, religious conversion and refugee crisis due to various conflicts. According to a new survey by the Pew Research Center, the number of Christian-majority countries has declined in the last 10 years, and Christians are no longer the majority population in major western nations including, Britain, France, and Australia. How many Christian-majority countries are there?
As per the Pew Research survey, the number of Christian-majority nations has decreased by four from 2010-2020, even as the number of countries with a Christian majority population still remains the highest. The survey reveals that Christians are a majority in 120 of the 201, or about 60% of the total countries and territories on the planet, in 2020.
The number was 124 in 2010, the report said. Why Christianity is declining?
The primary reason for the decline in Christian-majority nations is number of people leaving the Christian faith in recent years, according to the survey, adding that a large portion of those who leave Christianity do not profess any other faith, or identify as atheists.
The survey notes that the most most significant change has been witnessed in countries like Britain, Australia, France and Uruguay, where the Christians are no longer a majority as their numbers dropped below 50% in the past decade, while the numbers of atheists or those who do not identify with any religion surged.
Notably, Uruguay is the only non-Christian majority country in the Americas as 52 percent of its population does not identify with any religion, while the Christian population has declined to 44 percent. The number of countries where majority of population do not identify with any religion has surged to 10 in 2020, while the number was seven in 2010.
France, Britain and Australia do not have any majority religious group, however, the number of people who identify as non-religious is close to or greater than the number of Christians, the report revealed. What about Muslim countries?
As per the Pew Research Center survey, there has been no change in the status of the 53 Muslim majority countries as their number remains the same it was a decade ago.
There are only two Hindu countries in the world, India and Nepal, with the former being home to about 95 percent of the global Hindu population, which accounts for about 15 percent of global population. Hindus form the largest religious group in Mauritius, but are not the majority in that country.
There are a total of seven Buddhist-dominated countries, while Israel remains the sole Jewish nation in the world, the report revealed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
28 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
C'garh court reserves its order on nuns' bail pleas
A special court in Bilaspur on Friday has reserved its order on the bail applications of three people including two Catholic nuns from Kerala who were arrested on charges of human trafficking and forced religious conversion. C'garh court reserves its order on nuns' bail pleas The accused, Preethi Mary and Vandana Francis, along with Sukaman Mandavi, were arrested by the Government Railway Police (GRP) at Durg railway station on July 25, following a complaint by a local Bajrang Dal member. The complainant alleged that the trio had trafficked and forcibly converted three young tribal women from Narayanpur district. The hearing took place on Friday in the court of Principal District and Sessions Judge (NIA Court) Sirajuddin Qureshi. Public Prosecutor Dauram Chandravanshi opposed the bail applications, citing the early stage of the investigation. The court is expected to deliver its order on Saturday. Defence counsel Amrito Das argued that the accused were detained solely on the basis of unverified allegations, and no significant materials were recovered from them. 'The prosecution has not even sought their custodial interrogation. The alleged victims are all adults, already practicing Christianity, and have been sent back home,' he said. He also pointed out that the statements of the women's parents confirmed that they were not being taken away forcibly or fraudulently. The case has taken on political overtones, with a high-profile delegation from the Kerala unit of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) visiting Chhattisgarh on Friday to meet the arrested nuns. The team included MPs Hibi Eden and Kodikunnil Suresh, who alleged that referring the case to a National Investigation Agency (NIA) court by the Durg sessions court was a deliberate attempt to delay bail. 'There is a conspiracy behind shifting the case to the NIA court. It's intended to prolong the legal process and keep the nuns behind bars,' said Suresh, speaking to reporters at Raipur airport. He added that protests were already underway in Kerala, condemning the arrests. MP Hibi Eden questioned the legality of the detention: 'If it's not the jurisdiction of local police or the sessions court, and the NIA is taking over, then why are the nuns still in jail after five days?' He described the arrests as 'unlawful and unjust' and blamed the ruling BJP for targeting Christians. Eden also alleged that in some northern states, Christians have to seek approval from right-wing groups to conduct religious services. 'This is unacceptable in a secular country,' he said, adding that the Congress delegation had also approached the Union Home Minister and written to the Prime Minister regarding the case. The arrest has sparked a political row, with both the Congress and the CPI(M) slamming the move. Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai, however, has accused the opposition of politicising the matter and interfering with a police investigation. Adding another twist to the case, one of the women allegedly being trafficked, 21-year-old Kamleshwari Pradhan, has claimed she was coerced by Bajrang Dal activists into giving a false statement. She also alleged that the police failed to properly record her version of events. According to Pradhan, her family has been practicing Christianity for the last four to five years.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
US Supreme Court poised to assess validity of key voting rights law
The U.S. Supreme Court signaled on Friday that it will assess the legality of a key component of a landmark federal voting rights law, potentially giving its conservative majority a chance to gut a provision enacted 60 years ago that was intended to prevent racial discrimination in voting. The brief order issued by the court raises the stakes in a case already pending before the justices involving a legal challenge to an electoral map passed by Louisiana's Republican-led legislature that raised the number of Black-majority U.S. congressional districts in the state from one to two. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Operations Management Project Management Technology Management Data Science Finance Data Analytics Design Thinking Public Policy healthcare others MBA Cybersecurity Leadership MCA Degree Digital Marketing PGDM Healthcare CXO Product Management Others Artificial Intelligence Data Science Skills you'll gain: Quality Management & Lean Six Sigma Analytical Tools Supply Chain Management & Strategies Service Operations Management Duration: 10 Months IIM Lucknow IIML Executive Programme in Strategic Operations Management & Supply Chain Analytics Starts on Jan 27, 2024 Get Details The justices said they will consider whether it violates the U.S. Constitution for states to create additional voting districts with populations that are majority Black, Hispanic or another minority as a way to remedy a judicial finding that a state's voting map likely violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The case, due to be heard by the justices in their next term that begins in October, sets the stage for a major ruling expected by the end of June 2026 that could affect the composition of electoral districts around the United States. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. The dispute strikes at tensions between the Voting Rights Act, passed by Congress during the U.S. civil rights era to bar racial discrimination in voting, and adhering to the constitutional principle of equal protection, which limits the application of race when the borders of electoral districts are redrawn. Live Events Boundaries of legislative districts across the country are reconfigured to reflect population changes every decade in a process called redistricting. The court previously heard arguments in the case in March. But in June, the justices declined to issue a ruling and indicated they would invite the parties to address additional questions. Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UCLA, called the stakes enormous, writing in a blog post that the court seems to be asking whether the section of the Voting Rights Act at issue "violates a colorblind understanding of the Constitution." The action follows a major ruling by the court in 2013 in a case involving Alabama's Shelby County that invalidated another core section of the Voting Rights Act that determined which states and locales with a history of racial discrimination need federal approval for voting rule changes affecting Black people and other minorities. "This Court is more conservative than the Court that in 2013 struck down the other main pillar of the Voting Rights Act in the Shelby County case," Hasen wrote. "This is a big, and dangerous, step toward knocking down the second pillar." The matter is being litigated at the Supreme Court at a time when Republican President Donald Trump is taking steps to eliminate programs related to diversity, equity and inclusion that aim to promote opportunities for minorities, women, LGBT people and others. In the Louisiana case, state officials and civil rights groups appealed a lower court's ruling that found the map laying out the state's six U.S. House of Representatives districts - with two Black-majority districts , up from one previously - violated the constitutional promise of equal protection. A group of 12 Louisiana voters identifying themselves in court papers as "non-African American" sued to block the redrawn map. A lawyer for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests to provide the racial breakdown of the plaintiffs. The state and the rights groups are seeking to preserve the map. Black people comprise nearly a third of Louisiana's population. During the first round of arguments in the case in March, lawyers for Louisiana argued that the map was not drawn impermissibly by the legislature with race as the primary motivation, as the lower court found last year. The map's design, the Republican-governed state argued, also sought to protect Republican incumbents including House Speaker Mike Johnson and No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who both represent districts in the state. Black voters tend to support Democratic candidates. Arguments in the case centered on Louisiana's response to U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick's June 2022 finding that an earlier map likely violated the Voting Rights Act and whether the state relied too heavily on race in devising the remedial map. Dick ruled that a map adopted earlier that year by the legislature that had contained only one Black-majority district unlawfully harmed Black voters. Dick ordered the addition of a second Black-majority district. The Supreme Court in 2023 left Dick's ruling in place, and it previously allowed the map at issue in the current case to be used in the 2024 election. A three-judge panel in a 2-1 ruling in April 2024 found that the map relied too heavily on race in the map's design in violation of the equal protection provision. The Constitution's 14th Amendment contains the equal protection language. Ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the American Civil War, the amendment addressed issues relating to the rights of formerly enslaved Black people.
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
US Supreme Court poised to assess validity of key voting rights law
Reuters FILE: U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson signs the U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping spending and tax bill, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 3, 2025. The U.S. Supreme Court signaled on Friday that it will assess the legality of a key component of a landmark federal voting rights law, potentially giving its conservative majority a chance to gut a provision enacted 60 years ago that was intended to prevent racial discrimination in voting. The brief order issued by the court raises the stakes in a case already pending before the justices involving a legal challenge to an electoral map passed by Louisiana's Republican-led legislature that raised the number of Black-majority U.S. congressional districts in the state from one to two. The justices said they will consider whether it violates the U.S. Constitution for states to create additional voting districts with populations that are majority Black, Hispanic or another minority as a way to remedy a judicial finding that a state's voting map likely violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The case, due to be heard by the justices in their next term that begins in October, sets the stage for a major ruling expected by the end of June 2026 that could affect the composition of electoral districts around the United States. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. The dispute strikes at tensions between the Voting Rights Act, passed by Congress during the U.S. civil rights era to bar racial discrimination in voting, and adhering to the constitutional principle of equal protection, which limits the application of race when the borders of electoral districts are redrawn. Boundaries of legislative districts across the country are reconfigured to reflect population changes every decade in a process called redistricting. The court previously heard arguments in the case in March. But in June, the justices declined to issue a ruling and indicated they would invite the parties to address additional questions. Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UCLA, called the stakes enormous, writing in a blog post that the court seems to be asking whether the section of the Voting Rights Act at issue "violates a colorblind understanding of the Constitution." The action follows a major ruling by the court in 2013 in a case involving Alabama's Shelby County that invalidated another core section of the Voting Rights Act that determined which states and locales with a history of racial discrimination need federal approval for voting rule changes affecting Black people and other minorities. "This Court is more conservative than the Court that in 2013 struck down the other main pillar of the Voting Rights Act in the Shelby County case," Hasen wrote. "This is a big, and dangerous, step toward knocking down the second pillar." The matter is being litigated at the Supreme Court at a time when Republican President Donald Trump is taking steps to eliminate programs related to diversity, equity and inclusion that aim to promote opportunities for minorities, women, LGBT people and others. In the Louisiana case, state officials and civil rights groups appealed a lower court's ruling that found the map laying out the state's six U.S. House of Representatives districts - with two Black-majority districts, up from one previously - violated the constitutional promise of equal protection. A group of 12 Louisiana voters identifying themselves in court papers as "non-African American" sued to block the redrawn map. A lawyer for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests to provide the racial breakdown of the plaintiffs. The state and the rights groups are seeking to preserve the map. Black people comprise nearly a third of Louisiana's population. During the first round of arguments in the case in March, lawyers for Louisiana argued that the map was not drawn impermissibly by the legislature with race as the primary motivation, as the lower court found last year. The map's design, the Republican-governed state argued, also sought to protect Republican incumbents including House Speaker Mike Johnson and No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who both represent districts in the state. Black voters tend to support Democratic candidates. Arguments in the case centered on Louisiana's response to U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick's June 2022 finding that an earlier map likely violated the Voting Rights Act and whether the state relied too heavily on race in devising the remedial map. Dick ruled that a map adopted earlier that year by the legislature that had contained only one Black-majority district unlawfully harmed Black voters. Dick ordered the addition of a second Black-majority district. The Supreme Court in 2023 left Dick's ruling in place, and it previously allowed the map at issue in the current case to be used in the 2024 election. A three-judge panel in a 2-1 ruling in April 2024 found that the map relied too heavily on race in the map's design in violation of the equal protection provision. The Constitution's 14th Amendment contains the equal protection language. Ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the American Civil War, the amendment addressed issues relating to the rights of formerly enslaved Black people.
