Everybody knows that the Copts' struggle against the Islamic law is for the sake of the Church, and not for citizenship. Not even civil law can make Pope Shenouda lll of Alexandria accept a civil court's ruling for changing beliefs. This includes the Pope’s reply to the Supreme Administrative Court's ruling obliging him to grant licenses for second marriages for the divorcees.
The situation is very surprising. The Church adheres to its Holy Book literally and stands not only against history and interpretation, but also against the civil state, the law and the Constitution.
This is typically sectarianism and loyalty to the Church, not the state. In this case we are obliged to withdraw from defending the Coptic minority in Egypt because it simply does not belong to this nation.
If no one can force the Church to abandon its beliefs and violate the Biblical texts, then who can force representatives of the majority religion to abandon jihad (Islamic fight) for example, or to cancel the tribute imposed on the Copts who deal with a mentality which takes the Church's laws as their refuge instead of the civil state's laws.
The Church's stance is clear: it protects religion from the state and the evangelical law from the Constitution. It only cares about applying its own laws, and not the state's laws; so why don't we request the Azhar to do the same?
Now, Copts have to choose between loyalty to religion or to the state. There should be no confusion between religion and state.
Let Muslims rule with the Islamic law and reject the civil law rulings; and let people of the Gospel govern with their Holy Book and to hell with the nation.