Law and culture shape each other. The law, whether just or unjust, is a moral teacher. Most people draw from what is legal that which is moral, even when the underlying premise, that a particular law is just, is false.
Thus, legal restrictions and bans on evil things can help shape the consciences of persons. Failure to make illegal certain evils encourages many, especially the weaker-minded, to believe that these evils are not, after all, evil.
Therefore, a ban on abortion, if it were achievable via democratic methods (as opposed to judicial whim) would encourage many to form their consciences a little more properly than they might otherwise.
sitetest
I totally agree. Law has a huge moral component (no matter what the libertines like to say).
My point was that the shift happened in the culture before the law. Roe V Wade was met with a whimper according to some of the older Pro Life people I have met with (I was born in 75 so I don't remember). By that time, people viewed a woman choosing to kill her child as a net good. The law changed to reflect what the morals of the nation said.
As for what drove what (did the loosening of the contraception laws lead to loose living, or was the trend to loose living in the 1920’s driving the change of the laws) I am leaning to the culture changing. My Grandparents lived through the Roaring 20’s, and had some rather interesting stories what what the youth were doing back then.
The typical Catholic view has been that the laws shape the culture. My point is that the culture shaped the laws. So if we want to truly bring people back on board, we have to create an attractive culture that values life, even sacrificially. My problem is that, as an engineer, I am not the one with the skill set to do that.