"Balances" in the Egyptian society



Mounir Bishay





The Egyptian media has been heavily preoccupied of late with the issue of 
religious conversions, and authorities usually welcome Christians who seek to 
convert to Islam. The same cannot be said of the opposite, that is conversions 
from Islam to Christianity, with many Muslim scholars maintaining that ridda 
and the punishment that goes with it should apply.
One particular case attracted my attention. It is that of a 25-year-old 
Egyptian Muslim-born young man who converted to Christianity and married a 
23-year-old Muslim-born Egyptian young woman who also converted to 
Christianity. The couple are now expecting their first child, and made news 
when they went to court trying to get their conversion officially recognised so 
their unborn baby would be born a Christian. The case is a first in Egyptian 
history and many await, eagerly and cautiously, the outcome. 

Due to the sensitivity of the issue, I carefully followed the debates 
surrounding it in the Egyptian media. I was surprised that the general 
consensus was to forbid the young man's request to change religion. On a 
personal level, it was said he was not sincere but was a mere seeker of fame. 
From a religious standpoint, the ridda issue was invoked. It is beyond the 
scope of this article to discuss ridda, neither may I speak of this man's 
motives, since I do not personally know him. Moreover, I do not believe it is 
my, or anyone else's business to judge what is going on in the man's 
conscience. Such judgment should be between him and his Creator. 

A specific argument attracted my attention, though. It is the assertion that it 
would somehow undermine the "balances" of society if he-or others-were allowed 
to convert. I was astounded to know some people would sacrifice indisputable 
individual rights just because they believe they do not agree with the trends 
of society. I could not help wondering if some people are making a sacred cow 
out of societal values that none dare touch. 

I pondered what I had discovered about Egyptian society after being away for 
almost three decades. It was a completely different society from the one I had 
once known. Those who live in Egypt may not notice the changes, but these are 
certainly shocking for anyone who has been away for any length of time. For 
example, one cannot miss the appearance of religiosity especially as regards 
the way people dress. Most women wear hijab and many men grow beards. There are 
religious overtones in the everyday language of the people. It does not take 
much time, however, for one to see this is only superficial, and that real 
religious values are lacking. Chastity, honesty, love, mercy and kindness are 
not equally demonstrated in dealings among people. I heard new mottos 
circulating that indicate that people would accept and do most anything if they 
feel it will get them ahead. People are racing to make money and, no matter how 
much they accumulate, it appears to be never enough. Everything is available in 
the marketplace, but the prices are so outrageous that many things are out of 
reach for most people. There is however a small wealthy minority who can afford 
to buy what they wish. This creates various degrees of envy and competition, 
moral or immoral. Egyptian society is going through drastic changes; 
religiously, economically, and socially. Such are causing people to rethink the 
traditional values and to replace them with values foreign to Egyptians.

Do we desire such current, changing values to be the foundation of our lives 
and to dictate what we accept and what we reject? If society rejects a 
perfectly legitimate issue that will help preserve individual rights, which 
side should we take? The side of legitimacy or the side of supporting the 
unreasonable and flawed dictates of society? 

I understand that if security is the main consideration, it is easier to 
maintain peace when things go the way that the majority within society is most 
apt to accept. While this might be the easiest way to accomplish peace, is it 
the moral and right way? Should we sacrifice the rights of people to achieve 
peace in society? Where then are the security forces that are supposed to 
protect individuals from immoral and unjust masses?

At this point, some may object on the grounds that the views of society 
represent the opinion of the majority. They argue; in a democracy, the 
majority's opinion rules. They sneer at those who call for democracy accusing 
them of being selective and hypocritical about applying it. 
These people misunderstand the true meanings of democracy. Democracy does not 
mean that one person over the 50 per cent may do whatever he or she wishes 
regardless of the rights of others. If that were the case, the whole foundation 
of the society would be turned upside down. In addition to the concept that the 
majority rules, other important elements are part of a democracy and must be 
considered. For instance, in the United States, the White majority cannot enact 
a law that would enable them to deport all Blacks. Even if the majority did 
accept such a law, could it become the law of the land? Of course not, for one 
thing, it would be deemed unconstitutional and would certainly be rejected by 
America's Federal court.

The word "balances" of society has been used as a cliché to deny the legitimate 
rights of many people in Egypt. We have seen it used not only concerning the 
right to change religions, but also about a host of other injustices. It has 
been used to deny building permits for churches; forbidding Christians to 
advance to high-ranking jobs; and in the lack of just punishments for Muslims 
who commit crimes against Christians.

In all these situations the victims are asked to accept injustice because of 
the "balances" of society. "Balances" of society has become an elastic word 
that can be applied to almost anything and everything. It is also a word that 
sounds nice, but has a nasty, wicked, objectionable meaning. It simply means 
that the majority of people in the Egyptian society no longer accept the 
minority that differs from them in religion.

The government has choices to make. It may accept the present situation and 
continue with business as usual. Or it may pause and ask why have things in our 
nation sunk to such a shameful level? They should be contemplating how to 
change the society and get it back on the right track. 

Great leaders are the courageous ones who swim against the tide. They are able 
to challenge the status quo and change the direction of their nations for 
better. They deserve recognition and the honor of being numbered with those who 
changed history. 

It is wrong when the balances of Egyptian society tilt against the legitimate 
rights of two of its citizens. This is not the Egypt I am proud of. I pray that 
my Egypt will again become an oasis of hope and security for the weak and 
oppressed who seek refuge against tyranny and injustice.

------
Mounir Bishay is president of Christian Copts of California
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


http://www.wataninet.com/article_en.asp?ArticleID=15726

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to