In March 2007, a referendum changed several articles of the Egyptian Constitution. Despite the fact that no amendments were proposed for article two, which stipulates that Islamic Sharī^cah is the main source of legislation, it became a topic of fierce debate. 

This research paper analyzes the discussions about article two of the Egyptian Constitution dating back to 1997, while focusing on the debate in the Egyptian media following the proposal of the constitutional amendments in December 2006. 

Discussions about the article mainly involved intellectuals, both Muslims and Christians. They can be divided into three groups: the first calling for the complete omission of article two; the second for keeping it as long as it was amended and the third group wanted to keep the article as it was. 

Those who oppose Sharī^cah being the main source of legislation often resort to the principles of citizenship and a civil state, arguing that religious affiliation to a state is contradictory to these ideas. This group is composed of Muslims who do not relate to their religious identity, but argue out of a secular perspective, and mainly of Christians of all denominations. Many expatriate Copts use very sharp, uncompromising arguments and are therefore dealt with in a special section. 

Those who call for an amendment to article two try to find a balance between not attacking or being viewed as attackers of Islam on the one hand and point out facts that cannot be denied such as the multi-religious nature of Egypt or the difficulties and dangers of basing a state on religious principles on the other hand. 

The third group is mostly comprised of people known to be pro-governmental and who belong to the secular sector of society. But even though they share the same background, they do not form a homogeneous group: while most Copts do not want to provoke tensions, Muslims mostly argue out of purely religious sentiments. 

In conclusion, while participants in the discussion can be easily grouped according to their official religion, other factors also fuel the many conflicting arguments and debates surrounding this issue; such as the political component. This paper seeks to show how much sensitivity is attached to this topic. In addition, it demonstrates that the main divisions are along religious lines but that the reasoning itself is subject to considerations which can often be shared by Christians and Muslims alike.