There has been a similar if modest trend here in Brazil as well.
Even many Christians have some reservations about what has become the public face of "religion" in the last few decades, to the point that many people end up feeling the need to point out that they have their reasons to remain Catholic or whatever religion they were raised into.
It is not a trend I particularly like or encourage, although it is far better than the immediate alternative of having dogma-centered doctrines run rampant.
It seems to me that this is however far less a matter of true shifts of belief trends than a change in self-perception and self-description.
At least up until the 1950s people cared a lot more about how they were perceived by others than they tend to do these days. It was just not very common to show much deviation from what was understood to be proper. Not only in public displays of belief, but also in fashion, career choices and other public parts of one's lifestyle. Most people felt that they could not afford the risk of being "scandalous", perhaps simply because it was such a novelty with such unknown consequences.
The rise in acceptance of lifestyles variety has, perhaps unavoidably, exposed how little substance there was to the religious adherence of many people. I suspect that historically very few of the billions of people who ever lived and are traditionally considered "believers" of whatever faith they were raised into truly did believe. Among other reasons, because belief-based religion is all-out unhealthy and leads to disfunctional relationships.
Instead, it is fairly clear that most of the actual traditional role of religion has been to provide a sense of shared purpose and identity (not entirely unlike sport steams) and, for those with more of a religious interest, a language and framework from which to learn and express themselves. I very much doubt there was ever a time when most people were or could reasonably be expected to be "true believers". For that matter, I don't think "belief" is a good choice of word to represent the core attitude of a healthy religious practice, either. If anything, it is one of the worst. It is certainly representative of the most degenerate and unhealthy forms of religious practice.
There is a considerable measure of conflict among the various possible goals of religious movements, even within any given healthy specific denomination. There must be, if the natural diversity of personal inclinations is acknowledged.
The bottom line is that while I welcome this trend, I also hope, expect and fear that it is not very informative by itself.
For one thing, we should keep in mind that such a trend probably hints that those who still consider themselves believers are largely and increasingly deprived of the people who are reasonable enough to realize that there is more and better to religious practice than just sterile belief.
As open disbelief rises in numbers, so do unhealthy forms of belief that are ever less frequently faced with badly needed internal challenge from the adherents themselves. Or so I suspect, and so the news, social and internet trends lead me to believe. Tempting as it is to hope that the remaining "believers" will see the light and become more reasonable as time passes even if they do not leave religion entirely, the evidence seems to point out to the contrary. Social psychology confirms and somewhat explains that.
