I refer to the letter ‘Allah’ ban and The Joshua Project .

While others have focused on the word 'Allah' in the debate on its ban, Fathima Idris has gone off the rails by linking it to foreign Christian websites. What relevance are they to the debate? Even the government does not link the subject with foreign websites but claims the ban is to ‘avoid confusion’.

It is dishonest of the writer to associate the debate to foreign Christian websites and overtly link them to it. Perhaps the intention is to alarm than substantiate the ban with valid arguments. The writer must surely know that her own religion itself is missionary so its just a case of pot calling kettle black.

You only need to look in the Internet to see the plethora of Muslim websites, many targeting Christians. So what is the fuss over Christian websites? Unless the writer believes that only her religion has the right to proselytise to whoever they want but others don't. This, in fact, is the unfair policy practised in the country.

Sadly in trying to appease the religious extremists in the country, the government has only deprived other Malaysians of their fundamental rights and breached all known conventions on human rights on the freedom of conscience. The government exists not only for any particular race or religion but for all Malaysians and must be fair and not lopsided in its policies and actions.

On the subject of the ‘Allah’ ban, many Muslims have given their opinions. Some are against, others for. But in the final analysis, only the truth matters and there is no Islamic or constitutional grounds for the ban. If the word were not historical, Christians would be the first to distance themselves from its use and would not be taking the government to task.

Christians, after all, are taught to submit to the authorities but not when they impose something unfair. The government would have done better explaining the Islamic teaching on 'Allah' and contrasting them with the Christian teachings rather than an outright ban. This is the enlightened and civilised approach - through education.

There will always be confusion and it is the duty of all to sift the wheat from the chaff. After all, if individuals can do it why can't the government with all its resources.

Raja Petra Kamaruddin's article All that is haram explains the origin of the word 'Allah' and gives a historic context that would enable anyone with a simple mind to understand. Every Malaysian should read it and this coming from a Muslim.

The crux of religion is not argument but peace with God and meaning in life. The solution to world peace is not religious segregation but tolerance and respect for the right of the individual to freedom of conscience. It is unnatural, not to mention unfair, to force someone to belong to a religion against his or her conscience or to prevent inter-religious dialogue.

Such actions do not belong in religion. Christians don't indulge in proselytisation. They only tell others about God's message and leave it to their hearers to make up their minds. ‘Churchianity’ should not be confused with Christianity. Many things were done in the past by followers of all religions through ignorance.

There is no coercion, trickery or bribery in the Christianity that Jesus taught. Anything else is not of Christ though done in his name by groups with their own ideas. It is all by faith and is voluntary. People can accept or reject God by their response to the Gospel.

A Javanese Christian leader once told me that during the riots in the aftermath of the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997, Muslims went on a rampage. But one Muslim village head rallied his villagers to surround and protect a church and school. Not all is negative between Christians and Muslims and such acts of human kindness don't get into the media.

We should spread love and understanding, not suspicion and hatred.