Comment by jeromec

When you talk about the Shah being overthrown in 1979, yet 30 years later we still see a tyrannical govt. in Iran, it's exactly the point I'm making. Religious rules inherently will be interpreted by man, which is the danger of a theocracy. Who leads if Iran's most prominent opposition leader, Mousavi, with his more liberal views dies? Worse yet, what happens if Mousavi succeeds in becoming president only to be replaced years later by an Ayatollah under the reasoning he is straying too far from the religious path? All of the bloodshed would have only bought a few years of this brand of "freedom". Said another way, how can one truly be free if that freedom is subject to be conditioned or revoked on the whim of just a few men?