Islamic law for dhimmis forbids them to build new churches or repair old ones. That is, many will tell you, a relic of history. But when Christians in Egypt tried to build a new church, Muslims, programmed by centuries of cultural habit, took umbrage at the uppity dhimmis; the ensuing confrontation was bloody. "One Dead, Two Injured in Egypt Sectarian Clash," from [1] Reuters, with thanks to Twostellas:

CAIRO (Reuters) - One man died and two others were injured in uncertain circumstances in southern Egypt, a police source said on Thursday, in the latest in a series of clashes between Muslims and Christians in Egypt.

The source said the clash took place on Wednesday when dozens of Muslims threw stones at a private building in Damshaw Hashim village, some 240 km (150 miles) south of Cairo, which they believed a Christian resident was turning into a church without state permission.

Police arrived at the scene and fired shots into the air to disperse the crowd, the source said.

It was not immediately clear how the man had died or who he was.

Members of the Christian Coptic minority, who make up 5 to 10 percent of Egypt's 70 million people, say they face restrictions in building churches among other problems. The authorities say every Egyptian is treated equally before the law regardless of religion.

UPDATE: The authorities say that when Westerners are paying attention, but at other times they say things that are quite different -- proving that the old dhimmi laws restricting Christian testimony and inheritance, among other things, are still alive and well in Egypt. Witness this material that was kindly sent in by Andrew Bostom:

A Judicial Case in which the Supreme Court of Egypt Decided that Christians Are Infidels and Could Not Testify in the Court Against Muslims. Supreme Court, Domestic Section, Egypt, 5/19/1970

A childless, wealthy Christian woman donated half of her property to a Christian charity organization in Alexandria; the other half was left to her relatives. When she died, she was buried in a chapel built with her money. One of her nephews (a Muslim) claimed that his aunt adopted Islam before her death, making him the only beneficiary according to Islamic principles. There were no official records to confirm his claim according to the government requirement of registering religion changes. The nephew bought his aunt’s cook (a Muslim) and her husband to support his claim. The Christian charity organization and other relatives brought the priests and nuns who took care of her during her illness. All of them were Christians. The decision of the court was as follows:

All the witnesses of the defendants are non-Muslims (Christians). Their testimony is invalid because they are infidels. No infidel can testify against a Muslim. The Muslim nephew was given all of his aunt’s property, because according to Islamic principles, no non-Muslim should inherit property from a Muslim.

A Judicial Case in which the Supreme Court of Alexandria Decided that a Muslim Girl Who Converted to Christianity Is Legally Dead.

District Attorney, Alexandria, Egypt, 5/28/1972

As long as the defendant was a Muslim who adopted Christianity and got married, she is considered dead. Her marriage to a Christian is invalid and she should be separated from her husband or jailed.

A Judicial Case in which the Administrative Court of Egypt Decided that a Former Christian Who adopts Islam Cannot renounce Islam and Adopt Christianity Again.

Administrative Court, April 8, 1980

The Case

Mr. Gamel Youssef Hanna, a Christian, adopted Islam on 3/14/1953 and changed his name to Gamel Youssef Badawi and has an identification card as a Muslim. On 5/31/1974 he rejoined his church and readopted Christianity. He applied to change the religion on his identification card. The Identification Department refused to make such change because there is no apostasy in Islam. Mr. Gamel Youssef Hanna (now) presented his case to the Administrative Court.

The Court Decision

As long as the plaintiff has adopted Islam and became Muslim, he is considered as apostate if he renounces Islam and adopted another religion. And according to Islamic principles which he is bound by them as a Muslim, his apostasy is not acceptable. Therefore, he is not allowed to change his religion to the former one of his identification card.

According to article 46 of the Egyptian Constitution which guarantees freedom of religion does not contradict the second article which states that Islam is the state religion, because Islam calls for such freedom. This freedom which is guaranteed by the Constitution gives to every person the right to believe in any of the heavenly religions according to his conscience without coercion. However, such freedom does not supersede the Islamic principles for those who adopt Islam. In this case Islamic principles should be applied on those who adopt Islam which forbid the Muslim to change his (or her) religion. Thus, he does not have the right to renounce Islam.

***********************

Washington DC (4/26/2001)--U.S. Copts Association received the following story from Egypt.

The government moves to abduct two Coptic children from their own mother and hand them to strangers, under the name of Islam!

Washington DC (4/26/2001)--U.S. Copts Association received the following story from Egypt.

During the year of 1990 Emad Ayad Bishay of Beny Soweif, Egypt converted to Islam to obtain a divorce form his wife Fayza Abd El-Shaheed Tawfiq. The divorce was finalized in 1991 with court order 113. The couple made up in July 1995 and Emad Ayad Bishay left Islam and came back to Christianity. The Holly Synod of the Coptic Orthodox Church accepted Emad Ayad Bishay back into the church on February 1st 1996. Since the Coptic Church does not recognize civil divorces without the approval of the Holly Synod and since the Holy Synod never gave concession to the divorce, the couple were always considered married.

On December 6 1996, Emad Ayad who had a history of heart problems passed away leaving his wife Fayza and two children (Nermeen and Ayman).

The death of Emad sparked a lengthy fight with the general prosecutor over the custody of the children, Nermeen and Ayman. According to court papers obtained by US Copts Association, the general prosecutor writes the following in the filling papers:

“According to court order 44 issued on Jan. 29th 1975, the child of a Muslim (boy or girl) should follow the Islamic religion, since Islam is the supreme religion among all religions”

“According to court order 44 issued on Jan. 29th 1975, and according the holy verse {the only religion accepted by God is Islam}. And, since it is legally agreed on according to Islamic Shari'a that {no authority of non -Muslims over Muslims}. We, therefore, ask and leave the decision to the court to select the best-fitting Muslim guardian to take custody of the children Nermeen and Ayman Emad Hamdy El-Said (Emad Ayad Bishay before entering Islam)”

Since Emad’s death and for over 5 years now, his widow Fayza had been fighting the general prosecutor to keep her children. In spite of a certificate from the Holly Synod stating that Emad Ayad Bishay came back to Christianity and died Christian, the government still persist on taken the children away from their own mother and give them to strangers, just because their father made a mistake and changed his religion for few years. The government used the above court order to justify its case and ignored another court order issued on 12/28/1998 (number 255 for judicial year 6) which stated that “if a chilled is born to Christian parents he/she should remain Christian until they have reached a legal age”.

The government, represented by the general prosecutor, also seems to ignore a court order that awarded the custody of the children to their mother Fayza Abd El-Shaheed Tawfiq on 7/3/1996.

On April 21, 2001, Fayza was called to court -yet another time- in order to fight a government that does not seem to want to give up and let these children live with the only mother they have known. Fayza is a nurse who provides for her elderly parents on the top of her two children and lives on an income of less than $20 per month. These court battles strained her, financially and emotionally, and left her fighting and struggling for her daily bread.

This case is a direct result of the application of article II in the Egypt constitution, which states that the Islamic law is the only source for legislation. Article II was amended in 1972 based on a recommendation from President Sadat.