In today's NY Times editorial, Kristof seems to argue that it's OK that Muslims apply literal prescriptions from the Koran such as stoning applied as the penalty for adultery. The reasoning is that (1) Christianity also had brutal prescriptions which used to be applied, and (2) Islam may already be embarked on a reformation whereby they interpret the Koran more loosely.

While I'm willing to assume Kristof doesn't approve of stoning and although he obviously hopes for improvement, he is still an apologist for what I consider to be unacceptable acts justified by religious texts. It doesn't matter if the Bible or the Koran prescribes stoning, lashing or amputation; these are still unacceptable penalties. Christianity's gory history should not be a model for any society.