THE Church of England’s Religious Intelligence website is running a poll regarding debaptism.
The question posed is:
As 1,500 people pay to get ‘debaptism certificates’ from the National Secular Society in the UK, is it time the Anglican Church followed Rome and offered a service for those who wish to annul their baptism?
As of this morning, there was a 50/50 split among the votes cast.
Get your vote in here.
Meanwhile, we have learned today that the debaptism initiative is spreading to other countries.
According to this report, in Spain the high court has ruled in favour of a man from Valencia, Manuel Blat, saying that under data protection laws he could have the record of his baptism erased.
Similarly, the Italian Union of Rationalists and Agnostics (UAAR) won a legal battle over the right to file for de-baptism in 2002, according to media reports. The group’s website carries a “de-baptism” form to facilitate matters.
According to UAAR secretary Raffaele Carcano, more than 60,000 of these forms have been downloaded in the past four years and continue to be downloaded at a rate of about 2,000 per month. Another 1,000 were downloaded in one day when the group held its first national de-baptism day last October 25.
Elsewhere, an Argentinian secularist movement is running a “Collective Apostasy” campaign, using the slogan “Not in my name” (No en mi nombre).
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
March 30th, 2009 at 9:53 am
Shurely shome mishtake! Everyone knows that Manuel is from Barcelonausing
‘…the slogan “Not in my name†(No en mi nombre).’
How about ‘No en mi sombrero’. Not in my wide brimmed hat!
Catchy eh.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Churches should accept ‘debaptism’; if I want to end my membership of any kind of club, my record is deleted after some time. Why should these religious institutions, most people join while still in diapers, act any differently?
March 30th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Copy and paste cock-up. Can’t get the hang of the clocks going back.
Or was it forward.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Heh. It’s 80% ‘Yes’ now…
March 30th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Of topic I know but I can’t get over the Jacqui Smith story. If only she’d let Geert Wilders in, he could have brought over some “Dutch porn” and her hubby could have watched that. Now why he would want porn with a pretty wife like that is anyones guess.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:57 am
It’s another breach in the dam of religious ‘tradition’ that we are repeatedly told underpins civilization. Logically civilization should have ended years ago when most people in the West stopped going to church. Yet, oddly enough, things keep trundling along.
March 30th, 2009 at 11:51 am
chrsbol. Back on topic with Jacqui Smith: what are all these Christians in the Cabinet doing? Including the Prime Minister. What was Tony Blair doing to undermine moral standards to this extent? Then there is Jack Straw, another christian, and widely regarded in political circles as “harmless.”
I don’t care what Ms Smith and her husband watches. In fact, I have some sympathy for him trying to sneak in a few “adult” – is that pornographic? – films. What I think is well out of order are these leaders of society preaching to the rest of us and, even more so, grabbing a few illegal quid on their expenses. Mr Smith gets £24,000 a year as Jacqui’s assistant – that must be a nice little earner. Small beer, of course, compared to that Tory MP who paid his son £50,000 as a researcher while the lad was at college.
Couldn’t get the cash back, of course, the rules were unclear. The usual whine is “I have done nothing wrong.” Of course they have done nothing wrong legally: they make the rules.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Tim Danaher. Sure is. Kinda scary to have the power wielded by Barry Duke. An army of literate atheists ready to hit the key board after being patronised, sidelined and generally pissed off by the Christian mob.
I read that the Archbishop of Cant is complaining to the BBC about the inadequate coverage of religion on the World Service. The BBC is assuring him that the lack of support will continue and they will attend to the weakness of religious coverage on the World Service.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Wheee! over 90% Yes!
It doesn’t tell you how many votes that represents though…
March 30th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
chrsbol, Broga.
I think the government will dismiss the hubby porn incident as a simple error. A case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing!
Snigger…
March 30th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
remigius. Right on. I read this morning that Mr Smith started watching one film at 11.27pm and the second at 11.28pm. How many televisions have they got? What is the point of this?
Seems Jacqui “I have done nothing wrong” Smith is also in discussion about £120,000 spent on a home in Redditch.
Some assistant type said Jacqui was “livid” and had sent hubby out to apologise. I thought these political types got plenty of sex – the aphrodisac of power – and had scores of nubile “interns” all over them. Like Bill Clinton. John Prescott was in a cupboard with a secretary so it can’t be too difficult. Don’t know what the female side would get: muscular men perhaps.
I am not excluding other permutations and linkages.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Broga. Twas on different days alas.
However if I was married to that frightful dollop I would probably prefer a shandy too.
Back to the tissue at hand, sorry I mean issue, has anyone noticed the ambiguity in the original poll question?
‘…is it time the Anglican Church followed Rome and offered a service for those who wish to annul their baptism?’
What do they mean by a service? A simple acknowledgement that Timmy is too old for his imaginary friend?
Or a proper service, with hymns, a lesson(!), Barry on the organ, aunts in their new hats and uncle Bill in the suit he normally wears to court?
Everyone gathered around the font whilst a man in a frock wipes the stain from your forehead and apologises.
If so then the churches would be packed.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
The certificate of debaptism should not be for Christains but for Jews Muslims,Hindus and other religions too. The NSS should isse the certificate of baptism to all religions.
This will be the best thing to happen on earth.
March 30th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Anti relon
Good idea perhaps the Jewish males could get their bits sewn back on.
March 30th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/.....903301671/
Sorry no more after this I promise.
March 30th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
remigius: Indeed it was. Different days. My imagination was overheating. Was the man ambidextrious and mulitiple penised with the remote control in his mouth or controlled by one of these dogs that open doors of fridges and switch on lights?
Could it be anything to do with String Theory or quantum oddness or time being fucked in by Black Holes (OK remigius, steady, calm down.)
Alas, no.
Chrsbol. Don’t apologise. That Daily Mash piece was a classic.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Latest update… 93.8% for Yes… I think that’s pretty clear!
March 30th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Danny J. I can see you are enjoying this. So am I. Last time I checked it was 80% and I didn’t think it would go much higher.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
@ Broga: Wow, It’s gone up to 95.2 percent! Take a bow, all those who have voted today. Is 100 percent demanding too much?
March 30th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
‘Is 100 percent demanding too much?’
Er, yeah Barry it is. Even if the entire population demanded that the Grand Wizard of Canterbury be drowned in a bucket of nuns piss, he wouldn’t even get his beardy-beardface wet.
Democracy means nothing to these cretins.
Bollocks to the lot of ‘em.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:08 am
‘Is 100 percent demanding too much?’
Even from a purely mathematical point of view 100% would be impossible. As 95.2% have voted in favour, 4.8% have voted against.
Even if the entire population of the world were to cast their vote with the majority, the fact that even a minority has voted against would preclude a 100% majority win.
So yes. 100% is demanding too much. It’s fucking impossible. Twat.
March 31st, 2009 at 9:42 am
The yes vote is now 96.1%
March 31st, 2009 at 10:47 am
Ya know, Remigius, as I was drifting off to sleep last night, I realised that 100% WAS inpossible, but I just couldn’t be asked to get up and change the challenge. I anticipated that some smart-arse would pull me up and call me a twat, and, clearly, I wasn’t wrong.
Maths never has been one of my strong points!
March 31st, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Actually, since the percentage is given to only a single decimal place, I think that anything over 99.96% could actually show up as 100% so although not possible in reality it might be achievable on the screen.
April 14th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
This is just silly. Baptism is permanent. These folk are wasting their time.
June 24th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
@Sally: Baptism is NOT permanent. Debaptism proves that. In fact, Debaptized.com offers permanent debaptisms that can be granted to other people. You may, in fact, already have been debaptized by someone who doesn't like you (or maybe they did you a favor) without you knowing it.