The Christian Persecution in Egypt

http://global.christianpost.com/news/egypt-christians-meet-military-leaders-to-discuss-peace-and-compromise-57763/

http://global.christianpost.com/news/thousands-of-coptic-christians-gather-to-mourn-dead-following-violent-clashes-57721/

http://global.christianpost.com/news/clashes-in-egypt-kill-23-after-coptic-church-protests-57689/

It seems to be growing worse and worse by the minute.

Alternate source

Eh, not really, violence towards coptic christians has always been there.

This should be in the protest thread anyway.

Well, this sucks.

I'm not surprised, though. Revolutions cause violence even after successfully ousting whoever they're against. I'm honestly surprised it's not a lot worse.

All hope now comes down to Egyptians worrying more about rebuilding the country than killing each other over religion. Somehow I doubt it will end so optimistically, however...

Well it's probably more of a matter of lack of authority leading to ground-level violence. There's been a long history of clashes between the two groups for a long time. One hopes the next government in Egypt will be better for multicultural issues.

25ish people at a Coptic rally were hit by a military armoured vehicle.

Well, our hope is that the next government isn't the current military dictatorship.

Don't Jinx It!!!

He sadly may be right. The revolution in Egypt has led to a new regime desperate by hunger for one thing they thought they could get from violent revolution after protests. I dare you to guess what it is. No points for winning. Just enlightenment.

Aaah well...

The kidnappings, rapes, church burning and all that persecution has been going on for such a long time. In fact, Coptic Christians are treated more like subhumans rather than citizens. Although I sympathize with the Egypt protestors, Egypt is probably already under the control of radicals. Just like Iraq: From a US backed secular dictatorship, to a religious caliphate, only in the case of Egypt, masquerading as a democracy. There is a good chance for Egypt to be a true secular democracy, but I highly doubt that the majority of the Arab people understands the meaning of justice and equality, a simple observation, not racism.

Unless it eventually comes to the military vs the islamists... Egyptians would be better off with the military IMO.

Democracy is good only if secular and liberal factions rule it. If theocrats or other sort of fascists win the elections, democracy turns into Tyranny By Majority.

edited 11th Oct '11 5:13:29 AM by SavageHeathen

Speaking of coptics, I wonder if this place will ever get cleaned up. A pretty wretched slum to be stuck in

But...change is goog! Revolution is always good! There is no f*cking way a revolution can end up doing worse things than the former regime, right?

OK, sorry, I had to release a little of my cynicism. I remember when the riots started how most of my friends thought that this was a good change, and yeah, the regime had to change, but I'm always very skeptical of this kind of social movements...

But in this case its egypt military who act brutal toward Copts, not the Brotherhood.

See, now I feel horrible, because after ol' Hosni fled, I jokingly told my friends "now watch this revolution end in another dictatorship". And then it did. I'm the guy who jinxed it.

x5 So democracy is only good when your ideology is in power? Right.

"x5 So democracy is only good when your ideology is in power? Right."

I see. You support Christians being opressed. Nice to know.

No, he just thinks that the form of government is irrelevant, so long as the policies he wants are in place.

~shrug~

I was being sarcastic.

I bet more groups than just Christians are being targeted or attacked in Egypt for their beliefs.

A curious choice of words for the title...

Though humanity has always had that whiny little bitch part of her that must kill people for disagreeing. It's the fucking cesspit of stupidity that is counter productive pride and bigotry.

Though this:

somewhat irritates me. Like it or not, that statement seems slightly hypocritical.

Now I do not agree with conservatives on many issues, but the fact that you say "secular and liberal" is what bothers me. Secular? Probably a good idea to go with that; it's fairly unbiased. But liberal? no no.

There are more than just conservative vs. liberal. though while conservatives are often morons imo in recent years, they do have their place in politics. All sides have their own form of crazy. But I would fear any ONE party, conservative OR LIBERAL being the only ruling party in my nation. It isn't a good recipe for democracy.

I agree with the part about theocrats though, unless I was the object of worship that is. =p

I think he meant "liberal" in a broader/more old-fashioned sense.

In that case I can see validity in what he said.

It is more than slightly hypocritical. It is very hypocritical.

It seems like:

"If the majority is in favour of secular/liberal/insert-ideology-I-like-here, then the minority who disagree need to shut up because that's how democracy works!"

"If the majority is in favour of theocratic/conservative/insert-ideology-I-don't-like-here, then that's tyranny! The minorites are being oppressed!"

Isn't the point of democracy majority rules?

I think they meant that it is better that it is a secular and varied ruling body as opposed to a theocracy.

and no, actually the majority does not rule in a democracy. unless you mean a real democracy, which only exists in small communities if at all.

When people say democracy what they really mean is a representative republic