Search Results: interpreting her words

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that speak of war with nonbelievers, usually on the basis of their status as non-Muslims. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God. Most contemporary Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Islam's apologists cater to these preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally don't stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people but bad ideology.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to balance out those calling for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy, along with the remarkable emphasis on violence found in the Quran, have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.

Kanji Kato, an MP from Japan's governing party the LDP, made this assertion at a party meeting, saying that young Japanese women should have more children- at least three- or face being a burden on the state. Last year, the percentage of children in Japan fell to its lowest level since records began more than 100 years ago. Financial and other incentives to encourage bigger families have had little impact. Mr Kato said that when he gives wedding speeches he tells the bride and bridegroom to produce at least three children. "We need three or more children from those people to make up for couples who cannot bear a child no matter what they do," he said.

The 72-year-old father-of-six also said that whenever he meets a woman who doesn't intend to marry, he tells her that she will end up in a care home paid for by taxes from other people's children. Several female MPs have complained the speech was sexist; with one female MP at the party meeting reportedly standing up to interrupt his speech with the remark "This is exactly sexual harassment!" Mr Kato reportedly initially said that he had no intention of retracting his remark, saying that boosting the birth rate was the "most important issue facing our nation". But he's since issued a statement saying: "I apologise if my words gave the wrong impression. Although I never intended to discriminate against women, I retract the remarks I made because they could have been interpreted as such."

So, what do you think? Do you agree with Kato? And if so, just in the case of Japan, or in the case of other nations as well? And if not, then why not?