LDemocracy is a peaceful and lawful process achieved by a civilized public whose members are mostly well informed, reasonably educated, and especially NOT blindly driven by religious fundamentalism to hatreds of the disbelievers. Throwing stones, occupying public spaces, setting cars on fire are not symbols of democracy.
Actually those things have been common sights in every democracy I know of. In Canada, in the US, in France, and Britain. The race riots in the US and Vietnam era anti war movement, the poll tax protests in the UK, the Occupy protests, in Canada the Ipperwash and Oka stand-offs, as well as the G20. I can go on and on and on.
Really what you are saying is that it is not democracy when you personally disagree with the beliefs of the majority. That is just wrong.
People are confusing two different and only indirectly related concepts here, democracy and civil rights. The MB was doing well on the democratic front, but poorly on civil rights. All Egyptian governments have done poorly on civil rights.
For another example of a nation that did well on democracy and poorly on civil rights, see the United States prior to the Emancipation Proclamation.
In modern western nations democracy and civil rights are ideologically linked these days, but it has not always been so, and there is no required link between them. Some nations do civil rights well without being democratic (Singapore) and here we had Egypt being pretty democratic but performing poorly on civil rights.
I personally believe that democratic nations improve their civil rights over time, abd that this would have happened in Egypt, slowly, had it remained democratic instead of having that coup.