secularism is not a denial of religion, but a denial of the role of clergy in managing and directing the state. this was what the intellectual faraj fouda called for, and that is why the brotherhood assassinated him because they wanted to rule and dominate. like humans and companies, countries need to develop, change and keep pace with the times, and if they fail in the area of modernization, they will decay and die, or at least will lie buried under the rest of the nations. any modern state faces problems when it comes to providing security, food safety, welfare, social peace and d e m o c r a c y , problems that cannot be encountered without constant modernization and development. political systems and large international fi rms have just vanished because they failed to cope with the development. other countries and companies have failed to predict the change, the change adopted by their rivals and have chosen the declining path in which once they were leaders. we also believe that international companies, if they want to succeed, are looking at what their customers need, how to satisfy their tastes and make the necessary technical and contractual changes, which are required continuously, without regard to the nationality of these customers and their walks of life and beliefs. the same applies to governments, which should not be biased towards a specifi c religion, in a changing world of multi-ethnicity, animosity, religions and even philosophies. religion belongs to the individual components of society and groups, and the state must not look after a specifi c category, no matter how big in number. the state is obliged to deal with all on equal footing. gone are the days when a state would pamper one dominating race. the state that fails to treat all on equal footing shall face problems and prone to fragmentation and disintegration of the society. there is no place for bad intentions anyone who believes that his or her tribe, origin, religion, sect or gender is better than others will inevitably fail to deal fairly with their compatriots in the area of logic, equality and justice in rights and duties, which is what a modern state seeks, if we want to continue to exist and develop. therefore we must choose between a state which is biased towards a people, unjust, turbulent, fearful, tyrannical and a multicultural state which is open to all, and treat everyone on an equal footing, without distinction between race, ethnicity, religion or others. the fi rst state is not immune to the difference and turmoil because the confl ict within the majority is always possible no matter how coherent it is because the confl ict will inevitably result from a word or interpretation of a phrase or greed in the rule. the examples contrary to what we have said and the light of persistence of the steadfastness and survival of some states, despite the insistence on the imposition of their religious belief and interpretation of own religion on everyone will not last forever, and if it does, this might be due to the richness of those critical countries, and the policies of oppression and abuse, and not because they are right, or their model is applicable and followed by others. we repeat that our constitution needs a larger secular dose, and the people need a wider margin of freedom. the audio visual law has become obsolete, while injustice has been the order of the day and the time has come for its amendment.
