You said the laws are unenforceable. They are clearly enforceable because they've been overturned by appeals. Also, some of the benchmark domain and search and seizure cases have been about pornography and sodomy.
I never implied that people would never get caught…however the majority proceed unstopped by such restrictions. History has shown this and the futility of such unenforceable laws. Americans are not bashful about sodomy; apparently many enjoy it.
Clearly, the laws are enforceable to the same extent that drug laws are enforceable, people will still do it, but people are caught all the time.
Oh yeah, there's a difference. Especially when the Ayatollah can essentially just say something and it becomes law immediately. Remember, it's all democratic until you defy Sharia Law, then it's just a theocracy.
First, Iran isn’t a theocracy; it is a constitutional theocracy.
When a church runs the state, there is nothing such as a constitution. They have so much power that they will do what they want.
I never said Iran was completely closeminded. Western haircuts ended up in Iran after all sorts of things; Western influences entered Iran before the fall of the Shah, they were allowed to continue even while they were holding Americans hostage, and in general, they survived and were propagated by the younger crowd. For natural reasons, these trends continued as part of society.
Second, if Iran is the kind of cold, monolithic theocratic society that you describe then how did these haircuts and other Western trends take root in the first place?
The United States has laws on the books which are completely unconstitutional and are simply waiting for a Supreme Court case to overturn them. Those are the sodomy laws, those are the lewd acts laws, those are the ridiculous laws which aren't enforced because there's no way to make them stick without any sane judge throwing them out of court.
Much like our sodomy laws within the States…our legal system does not actively seek out to control such behavior or arrest those that are committing it.
That's in a westernized, secular democratic nation.
Iran is a "republic" which is completely ruled by Sharia Law. That means that if you anger the church, you get brought up on charges. They don't have the benefits of a liberalized society in which our main theme for justice is "as long as it does not hurt another and it is not egregiously wrong, you can do it," instead, the Iranian theocracy is ruled by a collection of strict religious laws where the judges, essentially, end up playing the vengeful preacher meting out punishment like it's the 1600s in Massachusetts. There's quite a difference between the legal system of the United States which is based on common sense, trial and error, and jurisprudence, and the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran which is based on religious law as dictated and interpreted by one man with a cult of personality around him.
Perhaps you're beginning to understand the differences between a democracy and a tinpot cult of personality dictatorship.