President Obama has decided public prayer is not for him, stirring an unholy row with the Republican right. Meanwhile, the news delivers excellent examples of the dangers of mixing Church and State

Why on earth should the American President appear on television to pray? As if President Obama weren't busy enough, he’s now really miffed the Republican right by deciding against marking the US national day of prayer by going on the telly and praying.

That’s right. Barack doesn’t want to say his prayers on the telly, so now he’s being accused of de-Christianising the country, as if that’s all it took. The unholy row erupted because the newish President believes prayer is something private, to be carried out in private, and so ends a ‘tradition’ that dates back forty years to Harry Truman.

It seems a difficult stance to take issue with—even the Bible warns against public prayer, noting prayer is something between a person and their God. Best leave it at that.

To be fair the United States identifies far more with organised religion than New Zealand . New Zealand ’s 2006 census had 55 percent affiliated with a Christian religion, whereas the United States had close to 77 percent.

The US is not, however, a Christian country in that no religious denomination or adherence is specified in its constitution. The place is littered with churches and synagogues and mosques and all sorts of venues for worship, and its television channels boast major tele-evangelicals drawing the sorts of crowds politicians can only dream of. But like all modern democracies, the US has seen a shift away from formal Christianity. If the congregations are waning it’s not a sudden phenomenon brought on by George W’s absence from television screens once a year praying. Actually, it would be tempting to find a causal link between church attendance numbers dropping during the dauphin’s reign, but that would possibly be a little unnecessary.

More important is the issue of mixing Church and State. Healthy democracies don’t do that, they strive to avoid it, but that does not mean they are shunning religion. Jim Bolger was a very proud Catholic and had a bronze etching of two hands clasped in prayer on his Beehive office wall but he didn’t shove it down other people’s throats—religion, not the etching!

The views of religious leaders are often considered in all types of public policy, just like any other interest group. Church leaders are not shy of trying to influence politics. It was the Anglican Church which organised the Hikoi of Hope in the late 1990s to draw attention to social issues such as poverty. Religious leaders have been very interested in Treaty of Waitangi issues, and the Anglican Church is officially the Anglican Church in Aotearoa while its Presbyterian neighbour is known as the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand .

Kiwis have also witnessed the rather unremarkable attempts of Christian parties to find representation in Parliament, but Graeme Lee—and more particularly, Brian Tamaki and Graham Capill—are possibly best left to fade from the collective political psyche. While Peter Dunne’s band of followers does claim to be very strongly religion oriented, the truth is religious parties polarise voters. They don’t want Parliament to start dishing out the morality lectures. Nor, it seems, does Obama wish to install a pulpit in the Oval Office, and that’s a clear signal of a commitment to a secular state.

But…should more evidence that this is the way to do business be required, take a quick look at Pakistan . It has created a hideous mess by surrendering the province of Swat to the Taliban so they can rule by Shari’a, Islam’s divine rule of God. The ultimate blending of church and state, although strictly speaking Islam is not a church. A big leap I know, but having listened to those accusing Obama of taking the US to hell in a hand basket, it is scarily relevant.

Any extreme in government needs to be avoided and that most definitely includes one that considers rule other than that of God as apostate and worthy of jihad. George W talking about being on a direct mission from God was bad enough. Some things just don’t need to be shared.

It would be fair to say that if Obama is a religious man—and he gave every indication during the election campaign that he is (despite the Reverend Wright)—he will be praying big time for any assistance possible to help sort out the mess he inherited, including Pakistan.

And, in that delicious way that politics manages to serve up co-incidences, it just so happens this furor over public prayer comes the very week the cheated-on wife of a certain Methodist Presidential candidate from North Carolina appears on Oprah to tell all. Now while Elizabeth Edwards is obviously drumming up publicity for her new book, a quick Google of John’s statements about the importance of religion is in his political and private lives would indicate Obama is sooo right to keep ostentatious displays of public religion out of his White House.