Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Egypt's State Council issues report stating Christians are infidels, and apostates from Islam should die

Is Egypt's State Council misunderstanding the Krayon, or is this the true Islam? If I say that Islam is an immoral religion which does not permit basic human rights such as Freedom of Conscience, I am accused of being a racist/Islamophobe/bigot/Nazi/extremist.

But, if the Egyptian State Council openly declares that exercising one's Freedom of Conscience is punishable by death according to Islamic law, then what are they?

My answer?

They are

1) Nazis
2) Muslims.
3) Extremists

It's up to the Muslims of the world to define their religion, so that we do not believe that the above three things are all one and the same.

Let us be very clear about this. It is up to Muslims to define their religion. It is not up to us.

If they define their religion in this way, it is up to us to let the world know the truth.

From Jihad Watch:

"Egypt: Christian convert's rights case threatens Islamists," from Compass Direct News, May 12:

CAIRO, Egypt, May 12 (Compass Direct News) – In the dilapidated office here
of three lawyers representing one of Egypt’s “most wanted” Christian converts,
the mood was hopeful in spite of a barrage of death threats against them and
their client.

At a court hearing on May 2, a judge agreed to a request by the convert
from Islam to join the two cases he has opened to change his ID card to reflect
his new faith. The court set June 13 as the date to rule on the case of Maher
Ahmad El-Mo’otahssem Bellah El-Gohary’s – who is in hiding from outraged
Islamists – and lawyer Nabil Ghobreyal said he was hopeful that progress thus
far will lead to a favorable ruling.

At the same time, El-Gohary’s lawyers termed potentially “catastrophic”
for Egyptian human rights a report sent to the judge by the State Council, a
consultative body of Egypt’s Administrative Court. Expressing outrage at
El-Gohary’s “audacity” to request a change in the religious designation on his
ID, the report claims the case is a threat to societal order and violates sharia
(Islamic law).

“This [report] is bombarding freedom of religion in Egypt,” said lawyer
Said Faiz. “They are insisting that the path to Islam is a one-way street. The
entire report is based on sharia.”

The report is counterproductive for Egypt’s aspirations for improved
human rights, they said. In the eyes of the international community it is
self-condemned, the lawyers said, because it is not based on Egypt’s civil law,
nor does it uphold the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights
that Egypt has signed.

The report stated that those who leave Islam will be subject to death,
described El-Gohary as an “apostate” and called all Christians “infidels.”

“During the hearing, they [Islamic lawyers] were saying that Christians
are infidels and that Christ was a Muslim, so we said, ‘OK, bring us the papers
that show Jesus embraced Islam,’” Faiz said, to a round of laughter from his
colleagues.

Ghobreyal, adding that the report says El-Gohary’s case threatens
public order, noted wryly, “In Egypt we have freedom of religion, but these
freedoms can’t go against Islam.” [...]

To date no Christian convert in Egypt has obtained a baptismal
certificate, which amounts to official proof of conversion.

Churches fear that issuing such certificates would create a severe
backlash. As a result, converts cannot apply for a change of religion on their
ID, but El-Gohary was able to travel abroad to get a baptismal certificate from
a well-established church. In April a Coptic Cairo-based priest recognized this
certificate and issued him a letter of acceptance, or “conversion certificate,”
welcoming him to the Coptic Orthodox community.

El-Gohary’s baptismal certificate caused a fury among the nation’s
Islamic lobby, as it led to the first official church recognition of a convert.
A number of fatwas (religious edicts) have since been issued against El-Gohary
and Father Matthias Nasr Manqarious, the priest who helped him.

“The converts have no chance to travel, to leave, to get asylum, so we
have to help them to get documents for their new religion,” Fr. Manqarious told
Compass by telephone. “So I decided to help Maher El-Gohary and others like him.
They can’t live as Christians in broad daylight.”

11 comments:

Damien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Damien said...

Pastorius,

Practically the entire middle east is a totalitarian cease pool. The truth of the matter is that most of the places in the middle East might actually be better off if Europe was able to occupy them longer, much longer. It might have eventually eliminated the worst aspects of their culture. I remember hearing, someone from the Middle East, (I think it was Nonie Darwish,) talk about this one Egyptian feminist who ripped off her Burka in public and got away with it, because Britain occupied Egypt at the time and she was protected by British troops. Yet according to Darwish, the society regressed. I feel sorry for any liberal Arabs who are forced to live in such barbaric societies backward societies, and really feel sorry for those Arab Christians who can't openly practice their faith, without persecution. Maybe what is happening with El-Gohary will change things, but I have a bad feeling. Father Matthias Nasr Manqarious is in mortal danger.

Damien said...

There are some Christians here in the States who think they have it bad and are being persecuted for their faith, but they have no idea what persecution is.

Pastorius said...

Damien,
You are absolutely correct, in my opinion.

I believe nuclear war is an inevitability. The Jihadists demonstrated on 9/11 that they are willing to do whatever they can, with whatever resources they can get their hands on, to kill as many of us as possible, and to do as much damage to our system as is possible.

Therefore, if they were able to get their hands on nukes, they would use them against us.

Since I believe this is an inevitability, I have allowed my mind free reign to ponder the possible solutions.

Here is what I have thought about.

1) We do not want to "turn the entire ME into glass", though many people do propose this idea with much wrathful fury.

2) We can not afford to run continuous wars with the 57 nations which comprise the Organization of the Islamic Conference.

3) We could pursue a strategy of nuking one city after another until we beat them into submission, but that will only encourage more Jihadists to aquire nukes and use them on us.

4) In my opinion, any use of nukes only encourages the use of more nukes.

5) Assimilation does not, for the most part, work. So, I do not believe we can expect an Islamic reformation to begin with ideas born out of assimilation into Western Culture.

6) Our strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan was absolutely wrong. And, the peak evidence of that is that we allowed them to enshrine Sharia in their respective Constitutions. Our blueprint for victory is Japan and Germany. We wrote those Constitutions. We eliminated the state-sponsored religions of Nazism and triabalist Japanese Shinto Buddhism. We did not follow our own blueprint for victory, therefore, we are destined to fail in those two countries.

7) Even if we did succeed, all we would have succeeded with, in my opinion, is establishig a Democracy in the ME, which would in turn have been demonized by all the other ME countries, just as they demonize Israel, the U.S. and the West. They have told us themselves, Islam and Democracy do not mix. So, they would continuously work to destroy an Iraqi or Afghani Democracy. Those countries would never be safe.

8) THEREFORE, the only solution is a long-term policy of Imperialism across the ME. In this way, we could pay for our occupation with the proceeds of the countries GNP. And, we could, over many generatations, teach them the meaning of Freedom and Democracy and Human Rights.

This is the only way, in my opinion.

Thanks for the great comment.

Annec said...

Thank you for the 8 step outline, but I favor the GLASS option.

Pastorius said...

Check.

You favor killing 1 billion people.

Damien said...

Annec,

The Middle East is not a tiny portion of the globe.
One problem with the GLASS option is that the number of Nukes necessary to accomplish it would be huge. So huge in fact, that implementing it could lead nuclear winter, causing a global mass extinction. Humanity itself could be wiped out, if not nearly wiped out, in the aftermath and civilization would be destroyed as we know it. We might stop the Islamic fanatics from destroying us, but at the price of us and everyone else being destroyed as well.

Second, killing ever single person in the region would amount to genocide. Not everyone in, or from the Middle East is a Jihadist and we shouldn't forget that.

Damien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Damien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Damien said...

Annec,

Also you know what, I forgot tell you about what the nuclear winter would be like to live trough, that would cause this mass extinction, and could eventually lead to our own extinction. Just imagine huge amounts of radiation, a sunless sky, plants dieing, including crop failures. Now imagine what it would be like to live in the middle of terrible famine while you are slowly starving to death. In the meantime people would be trying to kill you for what little food you have, or might resort to cannibalism out of desperation.

So can you see why the Turning the Sand to Glass Strategy is not a viability option?

annec said...

So glad to hear from you. Turning the sand to glass is what we all joked about in 1991. I rode past hundreds of burned out trucks (the dead bodies had been removed by the time our hospital got there). You should give us credit because we did not know if we would be nuked or gased! In my book 'An Analog from Adam to Nero' I have a detailed chapter regarding the H Bomb, and how a society would cope. I advise to disperse the population away from the cities and have a Star War Defence. I also introduce Ko Ko San, a girl I met in Japan. You will see in your life-time, the bombs in the streets. (Hardy Ministries 1970's)