Controversial preacher Zakir Naik has been a favourite subject of conversation for the past couple of weeks, first for being so presumptuous as to lecture on the similarities between Hinduism and Islam, and then for presiding over the religious conversions that have come with his tour of Malaysia.

Certainly, for all our talk of being a harmonious society, certain cuts fester under the surface of our thin skinned unity. Religious conversion has long been a bit of a bugbear. As Islam is the official religion of our country, and a Malay is constitutionally defined as a Muslim, adherents of other religions have had to tread carefully lest their actions be taken as attempts to proselytise. There are severe penalties for those who cross the boundaries of that law. As such, many non-Muslims are not comfortable discussing religion with their Muslim compatriots.

This is a shame, considering that this lack of comfort and trust between each other has led to segmentation of society and produced a strain of Islamophobia among the non-Muslims. Islamophobes among us are probably small in number, but they are vocal. Many will try to deny that they have caught this disease even as they tell you that people who don’t eat pork are stupid or as they echo Donald Trump’s words in the comments sections of blogs and news portals.

Of course, we have to believe that such people are not in the majority. We must believe in the better side of our nature because this argument over conversions is but a symptom of the greater mistrust between Muslims and non-Muslims not on a personal level, but on a policy level.

The marriage of government and racial identity to religion does not necessarily have to be a bad thing, but the lack of fairness towards other religions despite the privileged position of Islam has gnawed away at the non-Muslim psyche. Our temples are torn down seemingly on whims. Our crosses are taken down because, it seems, the mere sight of them would cause apostasy among the Muslim faithful. Charity programmes are branded by hardliners as covert conversion attempts. And time and time again, divorced women seeking custody of their children have dragged themselves to court only to find themselves at a disadvantage if they are fighting Muslim ex-husbands.

So, when there arises the issue of a charismatic preacher being allowed to tour the country and to convert non-Muslims, it comes with a pushback from those burnt by the inherent lopsidedness of the system.

But the question of whether it was right for those people to convert should not arise unless the minors are involved. Choosing a religion is a matter of personal belief and conviction, and we should respect a person’s right to make his or her choice. Throwing accusations at each other will not improve our lot. We’ll only become more segmented and divided, and sooner or later we will reach a tipping point.

This whole hullabaloo is not inherently about Zakir Naik, as controversial as he is. It is about whether the government works for all citizens so that no one feels left out or shortchanged. No reasonable Malaysian is asking for a change in Islam’s status as the official religion of the country. The outcry against Zakir masks a real need for engagement between Muslims and non-Muslims to find out how we as fellow Malaysians can be fairer to each other.