Talk:Egyptian identification card controversy

Untitled

got a lot of editing going on. Any discussion? Seems like work is progressing nicely!--Smkolins 21:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

SOP in countries?

One question I have is the Islamic/Christian/Judaism only identifications happening in other countries?

Another is any reactions from Hindu/Buddhist/Sikh communities?

How about non-mainstream Christian communities - are they still labeled Christians? LDS for example? More research....--Smkolins 21:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Smkolins,

This issue is specifically in Egypt in regards to the identification cards issued by the government which are required for every basic right, including healthcare and right to work. The problem also exists in Iran and other places, but this article is specifically about this landmark court case of 16 December, which is so antithetical to basic human rights.

While this court case discriminates against the largest non-recognized minority community in Egypt (see Religion in Egypt for more demographics), the Bahá'ís, this court ruling also discriminates against anyone in Egypt who are not Christians, Jews or Muslims. However, this court case is not about recognition of any religion, but the right to exist in a society. Bahá'ís in this instance have no problem putting a blank, or a dash on their ID cards in the religion field, but they do not feel that it is right to commit perjury just to exist within the country.

Non-mainstream christians still choose to self-identify as Christians so this is not an issue.

I agree this issue still needs research, I hope you can help.

Yours sincerely,

Matarael 09:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

SOP in other countries may still be important. I gather the rules in Iran are similar(though in a Shi'a context). Additionally I understand a new court case is working through the system based on children born to a Baha'i couple when in another arab/muslim country that did allow a Baha'i entry on their birth certificates - which is now denied on Egyptian paperwork....--Smkolins 23:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I see some semblance of these issues at Persecution of Hindus#During Islamic rule in the Indian sub-continent, Persecution of Hindus#Forced Conversions, and Persecution of Hindus#Saudi Arabia, as well as Persecution of Buddhists#Persecution by Muslims. None of them address Egypt but several speak to Muslim interactions with these religions. --Smkolins (talk) 00:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This might be a reference for similar issues - Group Classification on National ID Cards as a Factor in Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing - not to take the thrust of the article away from issues in Egypt but to supplement Egypt as part of a pattern or not as the information shows.--Smkolins (talk) 00:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Wrong lead?

The lead states that:

The ruling leaves Bahá'ís unable to obtain the necessary government documents to have rights in their country [...] they cannot obtain ID cards, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage or divorce certificates, passports; they also cannot be employed, educated, treated in hospitals or vote among other things.[1]

At least one of references, #3, states that:

The court's decision upholds government policy to deny Bahais the right to receive identification cards, birth certificates, education, and even medical care, unless they lie about their religious beliefs [emphasis mine]

which is actually what common sense tells me. Baha'i are not denied any human rights by the ruling or the government of Egypt, except the right to have their religion properly represented in ID cards. A Baha'i adherent can receive any document if they wrongly state their religion (the government doesn't perform any checks of religion, nor I see how they could do it). This is also confirmed by reference #1

The government must find a solution now for the hundreds of citizens who used to be able to obtain official documents recognizing their faith for more than five decades until the government decided recently to change its policy and force them to choose between Islam and Christianity. [emphasis mine]

Now, I understand that to someone, their religion may be so important that they would prefer living without an ID card (and loosing all rights associated with it) to having it wrongly stated in their ID card; but let's call spade a spade and correct the lead. Nikola 09:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I've changed of the lead to indicate the above, but also added that Baha'is as a matter of belief cannot lie about their religion, as opposed to Muslims which can (Taqiyya). From [1]

"What the Egyptian Bahá’ís are not able to do is to lie to their Government by claiming to be members of a religion they are not—both because it is a matter of religious principle to them and because they do not wish to perpetrate a fraud against their Government."

Regards, -- Jeff3000 15:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, an excellent rewrite, I might just touch it a bit. The article on Baha'i doesn't state that they must not lie about their religion, and as it seems quite tolerant I assumed that they may. Nikola 09:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

What about those with NO religion

In Egypt, ID cards require a statement of religious affiliation. Moreover, the system allows for one of only the three recognized religions of Egypt — Islam, Christianity, or Judaism — to be entered. The article is concerned mainly with issues faced by Baha'i's but surely the same applies to lots of other people as well ? Anyone other than a Muslim, Christian or Jew in fact. What is the position in relation to Atheists, Agnostics and others who are not affiliated with ANY organised religion ? Is there a "none" category ? what of people (Muslim, Christian, Jewish or otherwise) who refuse on principle to state their religion (or lack theorof) on any government document ? Is there an "Unknown" OR "Unstated" category ? What is the position in relation to converts for example a Jew converting to Islam. Can they get their ID changed or is it like Malaysia where one is effectively "branded for life" with the one religion ? Finally why does the Egyptian government think they need to know everyones religion anyway (i.e. what is the official "justification" for even having ones religion on an ID card)?

While it is true that these issues could apply to others, the major players in the process have all been Baha'is ore representing Baha'is or taking sides with Baha'is. At one point I looked for any reference to Hindus or Buddhists that could be affected and there are so few natives of either religion that they could be absent all together. And the rules are different if one is not a national. Show me any other person actually documented as being affected and they should be included. I suppose some hypothetical reference could be made.

As for "unstated" or similar, the Baha'is tried that and were rejected. As for why the government needs to know - well you'd have to live in a Muslim country - the line between religion and government isn't like in the west. As for converts - two issues. First, converting is somewhat allowed except away from Islam generally speaking. See Apostasy in Islam.--Smkolins 00:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Other countries nearby (such as Israel) also effectively state the ID bearer's religion (in Israel the choice is Jewish national [religion is Jewish] vs. Arab national [religion is Muslim or Christian].

I wonder what it says on the Israeli ID card of Bahais (there's an impressive Bahai temple in Haifa so there must be some Bahais around) or of immigrant spouses who married an Israeli citicen (and thus obtained Israeli citicenship) but didn't convert to Judaism (unlikely, but they must surely exist). If a German atheist marries an Israeli Jew abroad because they fell in love (abroad because there's no civil marriage inside Israel but civil marriages done in Las Vegas are recognized) and then becomes an Israeli citicen, does it say "German" in the nationality field?

I realize that this article is about Egypt not Israel but the issue is the same and the question why on earth anyone would officially want to state the religious affiliation (or lack thereof) on their ID cards is beyond me as this often leads to racial discrimination or even worse. During the Lebanese Civil War people were pulled off buses and killed according to the religion /sect stated on their ID card. Same happens regularly in Iraq. Nearly everyone with a J stamp (J for Jewish) in their German passport during the Third Reich was brutally murdered, so why bother putting the religion into the state ID card???

My own experience dealing as an atheist with government officials in some of these countries (Israel, Egypt, Syria) is that leaving the religion field blank is never an option. Sometimes they allow you to write "no religion" into the field, but usually you must opt for a religion, otherwise your application won't be processed. If it makes the bureaucrat happy I will write Christian because that fits the bill and gets the job done.

Often, Christians in Egypt have a cross tattoed to their wrist and sometimes there are police checkpoints where only Christians are allowed through (for example if there is a Christian religious festival and by only allowing Christians to enter there is less possibility for trouble) so everybody shows their tattoe to the police and is left through. Foreigners might have a tough time explaining that tattoeing a cross to your wrist isn't customary in your country but they'll usually will let you through anyway.

But why is the religion on the ID card in the first place is still an unresolved question. I'd really like o know the answer. If you ask people there they won't know and often don't want to talk about it at all. --Soylentyellow (talk) 08:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

While all good questions, this is not the forum for them. Wikipedia is not a discussion board; from Wikipedia:FORUM, "Also, bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article, nor are they a helpdesk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. If you wish to ask a specific question on a topic, Wikipedia has a Reference Desk, and questions should be asked there rather than on talk pages.". Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Israel's excuse is that it has kept the old "Millet" system which it inherited from the Ottoman empire, and recognizes a wide range of religious affiliations. That doesn't apply to Egypt, which has eliminated most of the original substance of the millet system, and only recognizes a small number of relatively narrowly-defined affiliations... AnonMoos (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Copts

There is also the issue of Copts who have wrong ID cards or Muslims that are unable to change their ID card after they convert to Christianity. [2] ADM (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Beginning big reorganization and update

I'm about to begin a big reorganization and update, including:

• adding the recent news that the first no-religion-listed cards have been issued
• condensing supefluous content --- the article seems long and unwieldy right now
• attempting to make it less Bahá'í-centric

hajhouse (talk) 04:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

As for "Bahai-centric", the Bahai were the ones whose situation was the main motivation for the changes... AnonMoos (talk) 12:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Lying about one's religion

An editor has removed a sourced statement (which I've re-found the link) that it goes against Baha'i principle to lie about one's religion, stating that it "implies that atheists and agnostics have no problem lying". The statement does not imply such a thing, but if it does, the fix is to fix the sentence, not remove the sourced statement, which is important in the context, because the Egyptian (and Iranian) governments have clearly stated in the past that a limitation of the accepted religions is not an issue because one can just lie about their religion, and this clearly goes against Baha'i belief. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 21:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

No sourced information was removed and no reference was removed. As you say, "the fix is to fix the sentence" which is exactly what was done. The sentence clearly states that the controversy was a greater concern for Baha'i due to their reluctance to lie. Ergo, anyone else could easily just lie. This is obviously ridiculous. Only sociopaths have no compunction about lying. Baha'i are not special in that regard. It is just as troubling for an atheist or agnostic to be compelled to lie about their beliefs. 108.67.153.215 (talk) 10:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if any such invidious comparisons were intended; however, those of Muslim or Christian background can consider affiliation on the ID card to be an indicator of their origins, rather than their active theological convictions. However, no such course is open to Baha'i, and it was in fact Baha'i who were the critical test case... AnonMoos (talk) 10:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

If any change is to be made to the article, it needs to be a change which does not obfuscate and obscure the fact that Baha'is were the ones who were most dramatically affected, and who were the main trigger for the efforts to change things... AnonMoos (talk) 10:34, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

You did remove the sourced information, that the issue was of great concern for Baha'is because they refused to follow the Egyptian government's recommendation to lie about their religion. As AnoonMoos noted above, the whole issue of the identification cards was brought up for Baha'is, because in fact most other non-recognized groups did regularly lie about the religion, and Baha'is did not. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 13:26, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

another source to factor in

• Egypt’s forgotten Baha’i community fearful and hopeful of future Smkolins (talk) 14:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

• Salafi spokesman in Egypt: “Bahais threaten national security” Smkolins (talk) 12:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

being included now

Identification card to Egypt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.96.92.192 (talk) 12:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Egyptian identification card controversy/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The article is very good in the sense that it is dealing with a very recent issue (December 16, 2006). However, it has some inaccuracies: in 1960, seven years after the founding of the Arab Republic of Egypt is somewhat wrong. Correction: declaration instead of founding. The court wrote needs to be changed to a quote. 40 journalists, writers, artists and academics wrote: needs to be changed to a quote. Change Notes to References. --Meno25 01:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC) Thank-you; all of these changes have been made. Matarael 12:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 07:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:14, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Egyptian identification card controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080215133731/http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL29677385.html to http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL29677385.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Egyptian identification card controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070123145617/http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/825/eg5.htm to http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/825/eg5.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090406052350/http://www.metimes.com/ to http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20061220-033209-2100r
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321010537/http://bikyamasr.com/52960/egypts-forgotten-bahai-community-fearful-and-hopeful-of-future/ to http://bikyamasr.com/52960/egypts-forgotten-bahai-community-fearful-and-hopeful-of-future/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Out of date

This article is badly out of date given the political changes that have taken place in Egypt. What is the current situation?Bill (talk) 22:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

This article needs to be updated

This article needs to be updated - looks like the latest information here is from 2012.

- 189.122.84.88 (talk) 01:11, 23 December 2023 (UTC)