Writing in his weekly newspaper column, Gamal al-Banna said recently that God had created humans as fallible and therefore destined to sin. So even a scantily clad belly dancer, or for that matter a nude dancer, should not automatically be condemned as immoral, but should be judged by weighing that person's sins against her good deeds. This view is provocative in Egypt's conservative society, where many argue that such thinking goes against the hard and fast rules of divine law. Within two hours of the article's posting last week on the Web site of Al Masry al Youm, readers had left more than 30 comments -- none supporting his position. 'So a woman can dance at night and pray in the morning; this is duplicity and ignorance,' wrote a reader who identified himself as Hany. 'Fear God and do not preach impiety.' Still, Banna was pleased because at least his ideas were being circulated. Banna, 88, the brother of Hassan al Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, has been preaching liberal Islamic views for decades. But only now, he said, does he have the chance to be heard widely. It is not that a majority agrees with him; it is not that the tide is shifting to a more moderate interpretative view of religion. It is just that the rise of relatively independent media -- like privately owned newspapers, satellite television channels and the Internet -- has given him access to a broader audience. And there is another reason: The most radical and least flexible thinkers no longer intimidate everyone with differing views into silence. 'Everything has its time,' Banna said, seated in his dusty office crammed with bookshelves that stretch from floor to ceiling. It is a testament to how little public debate there has been over the value of pluralism, or more specifically of the role of religion in society, that so many see the mere chance to provoke as progress. But now, more than any time in many years, there are people willing to risk challenging conventional thinking, said writers, academics and religious thinkers like Banna. 'There is a relative development, enough to at least be able to present a different opinion that confronts the oppressive religious current which prevails in politics and on the street, and which has made the state try to outbid the religious groups,' said Gamal Asaad, a former member of parliament and a Coptic intellectual. It is difficult to say exactly why this is happening. Some of those who have begun to speak up say they are acting in spite of -- and not with the encouragement of -- the Egyptian government. Political analysts said the government still tried to compete with the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned but tolerated Islamic movement, to present itself as the guardian of conservative Muslim values. Several factors have changed the public debate and erased some of the fear associated with challenging conventional orthodoxy, political analysts, academics and social activists said. These include a disillusionment and growing rejection of the more radical Islamic ideology associated with al-Qaida, they said. At the same time, President Barack Obama's outreach to the Muslim world has quieted the accusation that the United States is at war with Islam, making it easier for liberal Muslims to promote more Western secular ideas, Egyptian political analysts said. 'It is not a strategic or transformational change, but it is a relative change,' said Asaad, who emphasized that the dynamic was for Christians as well as Muslims in Egypt. 'And the civil forces can unite to capitalize on this atmosphere and invest in it to raise it to become a more general atmosphere.' Two events this summer highlighted the new willingness of a minority to confront the majority -- and the overwhelming response by a still conservative community. In June, a writers' committee affiliated with the Ministry of Culture gave a prestigious award to Sayyid al-Qimni, a sharp critic of Islamic fundamentalism who in 2005 stopped writing, disavowed his own work and moved after receiving death threats. Muhammad Salmawy, a committee member and president of the Egyptian Writers' Union, said he thought Qimni had been honored in part because 'he represents the secular direction and discusses religion on an objective basis and is against the religious current.' What happened next followed a predictable path, but then veered. Islamic fundamentalists like Sheik Youssef al-Badri asked the government to revoke the award and moved to file a lawsuit against Qimni and the government. 'Salman Rushdie was less of a disaster than Sayyid al-Qimni,' Badri said in a television appearance on O TV, an independent Egyptian satellite channel. 'Salman Rushdie, everyone attacked him because he destroyed Islam overtly. But Sayyid al-Qimni is attacking Islam and destroying it tactfully, tastefully and politely.' But this time Qimni did not go into hiding. He appeared on the television show, sitting beside Badri. A second development involved a religious minority, the Baha'is, who face discrimination in Egypt, where the only legally recognized faiths are Islam, Judaism and Christianity. Nine years ago the state stopped issuing identification records to Baha'is unless they agreed to characterize themselves as members of one of the three recognized faiths. The documents are essential for access to all government services. An independent group, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, won a court order on behalf of the Baha'is that forced the government to issue records leaving the religious identification blank. The first cards were issued this month. While the decision was aimed specifically at solving the problem faced by the Baha'i community, the case tapped into the evolving debate, said the group's executive director, Hossam Bahgat. 'It is an unprecedented move to recognize that one can be Egyptian and not adhere to one of these three religions,' Bahgat said. Still, he remains less than optimistic; most of the public reaction to the Baha'is' legal victory was negative, Bahgat said. 'It is known that you are apostates,' read one of many comments posted on Al Youm Al Sabei, a online newspaper. But there has been at least a hint of diversity and debate in response to Banna's remarks on belly dancers. Hours after his column was posted, some readers began, however tentatively, to come to his defense. 'Take it easy on the man,' said an anonymous post. 'He did not issue a religious edict saying belly dancing is condoned. But he is saying that a person's deeds will be weighed out because God is just. Is anything wrong with that?' 