Laws should be changed when new science proves them to be founded on bad science

 There's a big problem in that bad laws are difficult to change.

Laws supposed grounded in the scientific knowledge of that time they were made should be modified or even removed if new scientific data--evidence and facts--prove the old reasons for the law to be invalid.

The problem is people get used to something and then don't want to change. For some the law gives them a justification, even if that justification is grounded in falsehood or even lies.

Nearly 50 years ago some of the arguments that were used to justify the Roe V. Wade decision, to legalize abortion, have been proven to be wrong. Much of the scientific justification used was that fetuses didn't feel and couldn't be considered viable, "facts" that today are easily proven wrong through medical equipment that was science fiction in the 1970s but which is science fact today.

But the argument now is that a woman should have the choice to end the life growing in her womb. Of course, liberals won't use life. Instead they focus on choice. But that doesn't change the fact that an abortion terminates a life.

Here's the hypocrisy. While the pro-abortion side support the termination of life before it is born--life that is completely innocent--many of those supporters are against the termination of a life in the case of a solidly proven guilty, convicted felon who has committed multiple murders.

The reality is too many people don't want to be burdened with accountability and responsibility for their actions. They don't want the consequences. So they want a law to justify their unwillingness to accept the results of their actions.

Now before you go accusing me of being completely anti-abortion, I will state that I believe there are a few instances when abortion should be considered. But these instances are by far the minority and the rare exception. Because of the rare exception, abortion should not be completely outlawed but it should be strictly regulated, making sure those women who truly need it have access to it while also helping them understand the possible mental and emotional, and even spiritual and  physical, repercussions of the procedure, and providing the necessary counseling to help those women.

The simple truth is, abortion kills life and the so-called "pro-choice" group wants to sugar coat it to make it more acceptable. Too often the pro-choice side markets abortion as a procedure that should be be as easily accessible as a routine doctor's office visit, and they completely downplay, or avoid, the serious nature of what abortion is.