Well, the "mark" of Baptism is supposed to be indelible (although not visible) - so, from one perspective, a person baptized Catholic is Catholic for life.

If the person doesn't practice Catholicism, then it probably doesn't make much difference to him.

Islam and Judaism are passed on by birth - Islam by the father and Judaism by the mother. I don't know if either faith has a procedure for removing oneself from the religion. Once again, if the person doesn't practice the faith, then he is functionally not a member of the faith.

So, in terms of function, it would seem that a person must practice a religion to be a member. That's something that flows from within the individual. In terms of definition, the individual may not have much control - we are mostly defined by forces outside ourselves, whether or not that definition fits our essence.

I'm not well-versed in the legalities of membership in Islam, but I think it could be validly argued that Barack Obama both is and is not a Muslim. That depends on one's perspective - but for fundamentalists, having more than one perspective is anathema.

My four kids and my four siblings were all baptized Catholic, and none of them practice the religion. I would think I would be insulting them if I called them Catholic. If Barack Obama says he's not Muslim, than I'd say he's telling the truth. I was appalled by an e-mail I received this week that called him a liar for saying he's not a Muslim.

For all intents and purposes, Barack Obama is not a Muslim, although some people want to pin that label on him. And although my children and siblings were baptized Catholic by parents who believed it a wonderful thing to bring up children in a faith context, they don't want to be called Catholic - and I respect that.

-Joe-