What ever makes you think Taliban stoning a woman face to turn it into a pulp for adultery is normal.
If you think Canada and Afganistan have similar treatment of women, I cannot argue with you.
This is it isn't it? Your type simply divert the topic when you've been fully answered onto something else. In this case, it's stoning women, which you insinuate I would believe is normal based on contradicting your narrow minded unidimensional analysis of Taliban ethics.
But alright, let us MOVE the discussion to something we were NOT discussing before. It's gone from is "it alright for authority to paddlewhip someone" to "is stoning normal"?
The answer is it's not normal in my view. Neither is execution in my view. It's a primitive method of execution. Matters such as honour and adultery are just trivial in my opinion but that is my conditioning. Pay attention to this conditioning bit you seem to be missing.
So if Afghans would prefer adultery to be illegal, and the harsh punishment of death by stoning, then that is their business. If Afghans would like a lesser punishment, then that too is their business. If Afghans would like no adultery law, then that too is their business. Is it wrong for Afghans to demand a stoning law, no. That is their choice. Explain to me what entitles you to set the yardstick for Afghan law, and not the Afghans themselves.
BTW, I think my culture is better than that of Taliban's
I don't agree your culture is better than the Taliban's in the slightest. It's just noone cares enough to report on the goings on in your culture. Plenty of cases where Hindus stone each other do occur in India, along with plenty of others where they simply eat each other.
Here's some news of Hindus stoning each other over adulterous affairs.
Or just bury children alive
Why should you be the yardstick for any other culture when your culture in my opinion is regressive? (note it is my opinion that yours is a regressive culture since child cannibalism makes me sick, I'm a little torn as to whether this would justify invasion since the children are not alleged to be criminals or broken any laws, as in the stoning cases - this isn't genocide, but would be another appropriate pretext to justify war and interference).
and the West has better and just treatment of humans than muslim countries could ever achieve. That is why they accept people from all over the world and treat them equally while foreign journalists are beheaded and women are mutilated in muslim countries.
That's a little bit of an over-exagerration. Foreign journalists usually are not to be beheaded in most Muslim countries. But because security in some Muslim countries is poor, it occurs. I would agree that developed countries have a good record on human rights.... which is what makes them developed. I don't know why you're putting India into that category.
Again, the US did not ivade Afghanistan to save women but to capture Osama
Then you agree the women's rights reason is a load of rubbish, which is the point I've been making all along. Since OBL and Al Q have been extinguished from Afghanistan, you'll now need a better excuse for Americans to die for Bharat.