I refer to the letter by SB M Jun on how Muslims and Malays have 'tolerated' religious processions, noisy dogs and the burning of joss sticks.

Firstly, these factors inconvenience all Malaysians, not just Muslims. The difference here is that in these cases, those who are responsible would not mind engaging in open and honest discussion.

Take firecrackers during Chinese New Year as an example. The issue of noise and the ban was openly and honestly discussed by all who are affected.

When communication breaks down, dysfunction sets in. SB seems to have the right idea by calling for dialogue. But what good is a one-sided dialogue?

Secondly, the issue of personal choice - much as SB would like to believe, it is not personal choice at the end of the day as God gave us free will. Our hearts can never be controlled by law, only by spirit.

Thirdly, while he accuses Lee Ban Chen of simplifying the issue , he does the same thing when he refers to, 'the prevalence and perverseness of a permissive mind-set and a culture of abdication' and 'homosexuality which has gained acceptance'.

If he means Christianity, he will be surprised how much he has in common with a majority of Christians with regards to homosexuality or permissiveness. What he will find different though, is that they believe that if the heart isn't aligned on these issues, then outward appearances are useless.

So most will not look to the law but rather to personal interaction to get their point across. For those who do show 'acceptance' it might be because of unconditional love and compassion for another human being, and not from 'perverseness' as he so flippantly calls it.

As for speaking out against gambling, he should read the Singapore Straits Times and see the number of letters written in from people of all faiths against the setting-up of a casino in the republic.

Most Christians leaders frequently speak out against gambling and adultery. It's up to the media to publish their views. In Malaysia, it is especially hard for Christian leaders to get their views across. Perhaps they should engage a public relations agent to reach out to the people and correct his misconception!

I'm glad SB calls for a dialogue. I am sad, however, that he has come to the table burdened with many pre-conceived notions and conditions. But still, a dialogue is a first step.