Kaktuz,

On the Copts topic I happen to have lived in Egypt for 29 years (In a Catholic school and Coptic neighbourhood).

Muslims Copts relations only went sour during the end of time of President Sadat, who, amongst other actions, supported the right wing Islamist to combat the Marxcism that grew strong in Egypt in the times of Nasser.

Since Sadat assassination by Islamic Jihad (who he sponsored), there was lots of incidents in the south that pushed some of the extreme groups on both sides apart.
Apart from political and social discrimination, there was a new ‘Theological’ type that started appearing (mainly in the low income/ workers) in the society: that is both sides in this group ‘prefer’ to deal with their own people.
As an example, last August in Egypt my brother was looking for an apartment to buy and he found a nice one. Only to be told that the Christian owner of the building ‘prefers’ to keep the building ‘Christian’ whatever that means. I had Iftar with Coptic friends in Sydney last week and we never thought that day will come.

As for violent reaction, this is sadly a part of the Arabic/ North African culture is that they can easily resort to violence on any topic of argument. When the local news in Cairo revealed the pervert priest who used to sexually abuse his victims during confession. What happened?
- Riots in the streets by Christians (accusing the government of discrimination)
- Female victims were ‘forced’ to silence and not prosecute the pervert.

Most people there are not mature enough to process events, faith and actions separately. Nothing of what is happening in Egypt has anything to do with Islam or Christianity.
Having said all that, I believe the ball is always in the majority’s court to restore the trust and heal the wounds, which is the Egyptian Muslims majority.

BD,

Stay on the subject ‘Mr Challenger’ before we move to the next topic: slavery.
I referred to women rights in our Holy Book, if you can’t keep up just say so.

BD (sigh) - Your constant references to adult women as 'girls', your denigration of our abilities to defend ourselves - our autonomy, your belief that women should answer to their men who answer to god......I could go on about your patronising views of women's abilities, but I really have better things to do. BD - I do believe that you have a good heart, however, you are so blinkered you cannot even see how condescending you are. Ironical that you actually have more in common with muslims than you do with people like me (athiest) - you both believe in god!

On topic - actually when I think about your continual denigration of muslims and women's autonomy you are extremely barbaric - therefore the above is on topic.

Well the OLO police woman is now back scouting the posts keeping everyone in check so that no serious passionate debate happens. She does not read the posts or examine the truth, as she said herself, just wants to be accepted by nice people.

Hi Scout... a minor point please. "girls" is the term used for those 3 Teenage victims .. they were 15 yrs old.. they are not 'women'.
Where do you get 'adult females' from in connection with this ?
How in the heck am I attacking 'female independance, and ability to defend themselves here' ?

Mahatma, you have degenerated yet again to name calling, rather than debate.
-Prejudiced
-One eyed
-Extremist
-Provoking Conflict
-Ranting Muslim basher
-Condescending (Scout)

Not bad ! :) Maybe you can try for 7 names next time, and you lot 'rant' at me for being a 'ranter' :)

Lets go back to the ISSUE.

1/ Waleed (commendably) claims its wrong to use 'religion' as a defense for bad behavior.
2/ Waleed then claims in support of his position

<<No law or moral code of decency, least of all an Islamic one, tolerates the deplorable murder or rape of people,>>

Now, I've been making the point, that his supporting claim is in fact in error.

-I show evidence to this effect, and I'm name called, abused, accused, and suffused with 'muslim basher' etc....

Have I called anyone here EVEN ONE NAME....
So, perhaps this says volumes about my debating opponents position ?
(point weak,- abuse your opponent)

Mahatma, 'selective quotes' ? for goodness sake, you are supposed to be a scholar ! My faith in your ability to analyse is suffering a crisis.

Quoting from the 10 commandments when speaking of 'Gods intention for us' is quite valid.
Quoting from an outline in the Quran on "The Believers Attributes"
or the foundations of Islamic law is just as valid.

No one has shown me the invalidity of this line of reasoning.

F.H. stick to the topic :)

BD (shaking my head in sorrow) you pepper your posts regularly with references to women as girls - suggest you check your posts in the User Index to refresh your memory.

Now take off your blinkers and have a good hard look - do you not think it barbaric when people throw things like the KU Klux Klan, Spanish Inquisition, witch burning etc and then go on to claim that Christianity gives rise to criminal/terrorist activity?

Is this not a generalisation?

Are there not many compassionate and charitable christians who abhor the many horrors committed in the name of christianity?

If you can answer YES to any of these questions, then do you not agree that Waleed's article has merit?

Scout.. "some1 needs a hug !" .... I'd offer it myself, but you would probably need post traumatic stress counselling :) after all, I'm barbaric ya....

I'm sorry if my occasional references to 'women' as girls worries you, I must say in my defence, that I've actually surveyed a number of women of different ages, (no, not 'just' from my church) including old, and none thus far are concerned or offended, they even see it as a complement.

On your comment about KKK etc, yes, by 'that' line of reasoning it would be quite intolerable and offensive if we were lumped into a Christian 'mould' based on their behavior. Actually it often happens.

But what your not quite appreciating, is that your reference is tied to events far removed from the core/foundation events and doctrines of the faith.

It's not a difficult thing, to simply compare the teaching and life of Christ with the behavior of the KKK etc, and see that there is a gulf of difference between the 2. A person of open and informed mind would then ask why? and look more closely at the matter.

So, if I may humbly take this back to my line of reasoning. I'm not looking at the behavior of Muslims in Pakistan or Iran, and how they treat Christians, and then saying "Ah.. Islam is this or that"

It should be clear by now, that I'm going right back to the very tap root of that faith, to its own founder, and the one major document left by him, as he himself said "I leave you 2 things, the Quran and my Sunnah" (his example) He said this in his last sermon.

It could be said scout, that there is no finer or more accurate measuring stick for "Islam" than these. I'm just using those most reliable measuring sticks to refute the claim by Waleed as mentioned previously.

If he had left out that one claim, not one of my posts would be here.
Pls don't worry, F.H. will survive :)