Hamish Bidwell: Why do we judge people for their religious beliefs?

Christopher Luxon in Havelock North. Hamish Bidwell says, "We should be free to criticise him, or any politician. But are we really going to do it on the basis of Christianity?" Photo / NZME

I can't say I'm interested in anything Christopher Luxon has to say.

Just as I'm not interested in the game of 'gotcha' we seem to be playing with the National Party leader in an attempt to find inconsistencies in what he says, does, or what people believe he thinks.

I don't look to politicians, or the media, for guidance when it comes to issues such as abortion.

I have my view, as you'll have yours, and it won't change.

Yet here we are, with abortion apparently becoming an election issue.

I would've thought it was a woman's right to choose - end of story.

If I have any curiosity around Luxon, it's to do with the idea that being a religious person is a potential stain on his character.

Unlike Luxon, I don't believe in Christianity or religious faiths of any sort.

But I do chuckle.

Once upon a time, it was a prerequisite for politicians to embrace a form of religion. It conferred a kind of upright and moral standing to them.

Now, of course, it's viewed as a liability, and a sign of zealotry and adherence to traditional and outdated values.

Hamish Bidwell: ''If I have any curiosity around (Christopher) Luxon, it's to do with the idea that being a religious person is a potential stain on his character.''

I've made my living writing about sport, and if you do that in New Zealand, then you'll inevitably have to tackle the topic of rugby.

Now, it would be a stretch to suggest the All Blacks' head coach occupies a similar status in the social strata the role of Prime Minister.

Nonetheless, it is an important leadership role within the nation.

For the time being, Ian Foster occupies that position, and I've never made any bones about my belief that he shouldn't.

I've been very critical of the man and his methods, and particularly of New Zealand Rugby for appointing him.

But the fact Foster is a religious man never comes into it.

No-one assumes that that colours his views or impairs his judgement - Foster is merely judged on the team's performances, and the way he conducts himself in public situations.

Similarly Wayne Smith, who now coaches the Black Ferns following a long and hugely-successful association with the All Blacks.

Smith is a man admired and trusted by many. Like Foster, he's also a religious one.

I get that politics and rugby are different. But I'd also point out that culture and identity and sexuality and inclusivity are as important in dressing rooms as they are in the real world.

Only, there isn't anyone who would be foolish enough to suggest men such as Foster and Smith are unfit to guide those diverse groups on the basis of their Christianity.

In my view, I doubt Christopher Luxon will make much of a Prime Minister, should he ever find himself in that position. Equally, though, I don't think any religious faith will be at the root of his failings.

We should be free to criticise him, or any politician, all we like. But are we really going to do it on the basis of Christianity?

Frankly, I'm far more interested in the price of milk.