Life imitating Art. This is a must read:
Salam Doctor,
Allow  me to  begin by wishing  you a happy new Gregorian year. May this new  (Gregorian) year bring with  it God's goodness for all of us.
I have disagreed with you before and I must say, this time, with respect, I disagree with you even more. 
First   of all, let me say that I do not know for sure whether the Prime   Minister's minders did in fact ask the Bishop to remove all crucifixes   and prohibit the Christians from reciting hymns at the function attended   by the Prime Minister. There are reports which say that that happened.   And there are also reports which say that it did not happen.
Whatever   it is, assuming that it did take place, one thing is for sure. The   instruction or request did not come from the Prime Minister. 
I   am really disappointed that you viewed the Prime Minister's visit to   the function at hand was a lowly act of besmirching his feet with dirt.   This is what you said:
"Kesediaan  dan kesudian PM yang sanggup ‘mencemar duli’ pergi ke ‘rumah ibadat’  tersebut sepatut diberikan penghargaan dan pujian, bukannya  dilacurpolitikkan." (emphasis is mine). 
The   expression "mencemar duli", loosely translated means to dirty one's   feet or sole. That expression is normally used to express gratitude to   our Rulers for having graced any of our function with their Highness'   presence. It is expressed thus;
"Patik menjunjung kasih Tuanku kerana sudi mencemar duli Tuanku ke upacara ini."
By   using that expression to describe the Prime Minister's visit to the   function at hand, you are implying that it was actually beneath the   Prime Minister to attend such a function and that  the Prime Minister   was actually going out of his way to lower himself to attend the said   function.
Doctor, with all due respect, that was unbecoming of you as an ulamak. 
We   live in a multi-ethnic-faith society. It was none other than the Prime   Minister himself who is advocating the concept of 1Malaysia. That   concept, as I understand it, would among others, entail the acceptance   by all of us, regardless of breed, creed and faith that we should, as   the people of Malaysia, live in harmony and respect for each other. 
The   Prime Minister is the Prime Minister of Malaysia. He is not the Prime   Minister of the Muslims or Malays only. As President of UMNO, he may be   the leader of the Malays who are members of UMNO. As President of the   Barisan Nasional, he is the leader of everybody who is a member of the   component parties of the BN. But as the Prime Minister of Malaysia, he   acts for all of us Malaysians.
In  that capacity,  he has to attend to the interests of all of us,  regardless of our faith  and race. If he attends a hari raya  celebration, he must also attend a  Deepavali and Chinese New Year  celebration. The same goes with the  Christmas celebration. He just has  to attend it because he is the Prime  Minister of Malaysia. 
It  is not beneath him to  do so. By attending a Christmas function, he is  not "mencemar" his  "duli" or dirtying his feet or sole. He is  performing his social duty as  a Prime Minister. If he did not perform  such action, than it is his  reputation as a leader which is going to be  "tercemar".
Your   argument that Muslims are prohibited from attending religious   celebrations of other faith than Islam is simplistic at its core. To my   mind Islam is all about one's closeness to God and His will. What   problem would God have against anybody who attend a non-Muslim   celebration if his faith in God and His way is unshakeable? 
Are   you saying that by attending the function that night, the Prime   Minister's faith in God would in any way diminish? I think we should all   give the Prime Minister a little bit more credit here. 
In   fact, the latest pronouncement on this issue was made by Dr Ghaith bin   Muhammad al-Sheikh al-Mubarak, a member of the Council of Senior  Ulamak  of Saudi Arabia. He opined on 23rd December 2010 that Muslims  can take  part in religious festivals of other faiths if the purpose of  their  attendance is to attract non-Muslims to Islam.
According to local daily the Saudi Gazette, he said "by attending festivals of other faiths Muslims could help to “pacify their souls” and   when a Muslim rejects an invitation to attend such a festival it could   alienate non-Muslims and divert them from the right path.
And   so Doctor, it would appear now that it all boils down to one's   intention. Was the Prime Minister intending to be a Christian by   attending that function or was he making a move for unity that night?
While   I was studying at King's College, my law library was housed in an old   church. Are you saying that I should not have gone to the library   because it was in a church Doctor? Are you saying that before entering   the library I should have requested the librarian or College authority   to respect me by removing all crucifixes adorning the walls?
You cite the example of Caliph Omar not wanting to pray in a Church as an example. This is what you said:
"Sudah   tentu kita masih ingat kisah Khalifah Islam kedua, Saidina Omar   Al-Khattab yang pernah melawat gereja. Ketika tiba waktu sembahyang,   paderi tersebut menawarkan Omar untuk solat di gereja. Namun, Saidina   Omar menolak dan memilih untuk tidak solat di dalam gereja kerana   ditakuti boleh menimbulkan fitnah. Mungkin orang Kristian akan   beranggapan Omar mahu menukarkan gereja menjadi masjid. Semua ini   dilakukan atas kebijaksanaan seseorang pemimpin."
With   respect Doctor, that is not the true historical account of the   incident. Caliph Omar declined to pray in the Church of Holy Sepulchre   not because he feared unwarranted aspersions or he did not want the   Christians to think that he (Omar) would want to turn the church into a   mosque. That was a twisted view.
For  the record,  Caliph Omar captured Jerusalem after a brief and bloodless  seige,  from  the Byzantines in February 638. Caliph Omar Ibn  al-Khattab accepted the  city's surrender from Patriarch Sophronius in  person. 
Omar   was shown the great Church of the Holy Sepulchre and offered a place  to  pray in it, but he refused. He declined out of absolute respect for  the  Christians and their church and not out of fear as you stated. He   declined because he thought that if he did so, a precedent would be set   and that future generations of Muslims might say that Omar prayed there   and then they might convert that Church into a Mosque. It was out of   that concern and respect that he refused to pray there.
He   then proceeded to pray at the steps outside the Church. By doing so he   averted the possibility of the Church being turned into a mosque. Such   was his great respect for Christians, Christianity and churches. 
Fair   enough, Omar's fears almost came to reality when in 1193 Saladin's son   Aphdal Ali build a mosque near the site of that incident although the   location is not exact, for the entrance to the Church was on the east  in  Omar's time and the present entrance was only inaugurated in the  11th  century.
You  made a big issue on the apparent  Christmas celebration in Malaysia  which according to you is way out of  proportion considering Christians  constitute only about 10% of our  populations. Are they to blame if  shops and shopping complexes, and in  fact the whole commercial world in  the whole universe, view Christmas  and its celebration as a commercial  activity rather than a pure  religious event?
The  thing about Christmas  "celebration" which is way out of proportion in  our country and any  other country in the world is this. It is not about  religion at all. It  is the capitalism god at work. You should realise  that dear Doctor.
As   a Muslim, I am in fact thankful that our Hari Raya is not celebrated  in  such a big way as Christmas is. At least Hari Raya is preserved as a   pure religious event where Muslims would go to the mosque and visit  each  other and undertake charitable work. Even then, our Hari Raya has,   nowadays, morphed into a cultural and social event. Notice for  example,  dear Doctor, how we have open houses which really in effect  not "open"  anymore nowadays?
Caliph  Omar, for example,  refused to build a huge mosque after capturing  Jerusalem. He opted to  build a modest mosque on the Temple Mount  instead. Clearly, size and  quantity was not important to him. What  matters is his faith I suppose.
Complaining   on the number of churches and how big Christmas celebration is in our   country is, to me - and I say this with the greatest of respect to you -   childish. It is reflective of the inferiority complex which we Muslims   are imbued with nowadays. It makes us want to retire into our cocoon,   sulking and whining at how big and prettier other people are and how we   should resent them and how unfair this whole new world is to us. If  the  Prophet were to behave like that in his early days in Mekah, I  wonder  whether Islam would be a great way of life it is now.
The   great way of life that we know as Islam is not about public holidays  or  the size of our mosques. If you are going to compare the number of   public holidays we have, are you going to equate football with our   religion just because we have a public holiday after winning the Suzuki   Cup recently, just as we have a public holiday for hari raya every  year?  We have more and bigger office complexes than mosques. Don't you  feel  these office complexes are more important than mosques and thus  conclude  that our people place office complexes on a higher plane than  mosques?
The   Prophet (peace be upon him) was well known for his respect to other   religions, especially to the kitabiyyah (the people of the book, namely,   the Jews and Christians). In a letter from him to Negus, the king of   Abyssinia, he wrote:
From Muhammad, God’s Messenger, to the Negus Asham, the King of Abyssinia;
Peace   be upon you! On this occasion, I praise God, the Sovereign, the Holy   One free from all defects, the Giver of security, the Watcher over His   creatures, and I bear witness that Jesus is a spirit from God, and a   word from Him, whom He bestowed upon Mary, who was chaste, pure and   virgin. I call you to God, One with no partner. (Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya 3.104).
The   Prophet (peace be upon him) was not only respectful to a Christian  King  but he in fact acknowledged Jesus and Mary in his letter. Such was  the  message of one-ness which the Prophet (peace be upon him) was   advocating. 
It  is known that in Islam, we are  allowed to marry the ahlil-kitab  (people of the book) without them  having to convert to Islam. I would  ask, if this is so, would our  Christian spouse be required to remove  her crucifix before we sleep with  her every night? How would she pray  in our house in that event?
The   contemporary approach towards achieving the globalisation of Islam is   one of inclusiveness, dear Doctor. As such, it comes as no surprise,  for  instance, for Sheikh Ahmed Hassoun, the Mufti of Syria to declare  that Islam commands its followers to protect Judaism early last year. 
While   the world is fast moving into an era of inter-faith acceptance and   embrace inter-religious accord, it is disheartening to see Malaysia   regressing into medieval insecurity and inferiority complex. It is this   complex which causes the likes of the Mufti of Johor to issue a fatwa   saying Islam forbids Muslims from dressing up as Santa forgetting that   Santa is not a religious icon but rather a commercial icon which has   been elevated to a cultural one (which is similar to the act of giving   away "duit raya" on hari raya in Malaysia).
You   make known your concern of the visit by the Prime Minister being   politisised and reminded of an incident where a former leader was   undermine by a picture before. That was of course referring to the   picture of Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah who was pictured wearing a Kadazan   headgear with a crucifix symbol in 1990.
How   sad. That picture was misused as a character assassination by none  other  than the government- controlled mainstream newspapers in an  election to  defeat the Tengku. 
If  that happens to the  Prime Minister just because he attends the  Christmas function recently,  don't you think Doctor that it is your  duty as an ulamak to educate the  Muslim public, as part of your dakwah,  to ignore such irresponsible and  gutter politics? 
By  condoning the alleged  action in requesting the removal of the  crucifix, I am afraid to say  that you are in fact indirectly promoting  that kind of silly  politicisation of theocratic phobias.  
As   Muslims, we make noises when people of other faiths perceivably treat   our religion with disrespect. If non-Muslims could be asked to wear   tudung before entering the mosque to observe the sanctity of our mosque,   why can't we Muslims, reciprocate and accord the same respect to other   faiths by at least allowing them to bear their objects of faith?
Islam,   from the very beginning - and I mean to say from day one - was   inextricably connected to Christianity in many ways than we would even   care to admit. On the very day the Prophet (peace be upon him) was   revealed the first verse Iqra', he did not know what had happened to   him. He ran back home in fear, trembling in shock. Do you remember who   told him that he had been appointed God's messenger?
It   was none other than Khadija's (the Prophet's wife) cousin, Warqa bin   Naufal, a Christian with knowledge of biblical lore, who told Muhammad   (peace be upon him) that he had been revealed a divine message, just   like Moses before him. Such was the close association between Islam and   Christian on the very first day of its existence.
Why can't we Muslims acknowledge that and stop being in fear and stop disbelieving in our ability to be true to our faith? 
Why can't we work towards inclusiveness, towards unity, towards acceptance and towards one-ness. 
Or does God really want us to remind ourselves of how different we are from the rest of the world all the time?
Salam.