The Times on "Executing Christians"

So, a few days ago, in a post called "An Outrage in Afghanistan," I noted the case of Abdul Rahman, who apparently faces execution in Afghanistan for converting to Christianity.  (According to some more recent reports, he might end up being declared "mentally unfit", and therefore not subject to penalties for his apostasy).  Now I learn that the New York Times has an editorial today, called "Outrage in Afghanistan," about the same case, expressing (pretty much) the same views I did.  Hmmm . . . I'm getting nervous.

In all seriousness, though, this line in the editorial did raise some questions:  "Muslim leaders would also do well to condemn this strongly; those who continue to hold the teachings of Islam hostage to intolerance do grievous harm to their religion."  I'm not an expert on Islam, but I imagine that those who wrote the editorial aren't, either.  So, is the editorial's claim that, in fact, the call to execute Rahman for apostasy really is inconsistent with Islam, and so "Muslim leaders" -- in order to be good Muslims -- should condemn the call?  Or, is the claim that Muslim leaders should -- in order to be good citizens of the 21-st century secular world order -- condemn the call in order to help move Islam in a direction that the editors think Islam (and all religions) should go (i.e., away from "intolerance"?).