I can't remember exactly what it was or where I found it, but it was an expressed desire on a religious context for birth control to remain illegal because its legalization would lead to abortion and divorce. My first thought was that "well if they can't get the pill there, at least they can get it someplace else" and my second thought was something along the lines of "why should someone have to relocate because their religion isn't the basis for the governing of the majority?" Anyway, I'm willing to deal with this as a fictional premise simply because it's probably going to grow too complicated for me to persist in treating as a reality at some point. For reference, I treat abortion as different from birth control. Birth control is good because it prevents abortions that could have been prevented pregnancies. I'm a firm believer in aborting ectopic pregnancies, undecided on aborting deformed fetuses that might live if they self-expell, and negative on abortion simply because a child is not wanted. But what if instead of law based on the state, individual cults could enforce laws on their followers? Say that you were part of a religious group that banned divorce and adultery at the same time? It would have a different culture than the neighbor who believed in non-monogamist practices. Still, the state acknowledged that a particular cult could legally kill someone for a transgression that the majority doesn't think is even a crime. It's part of individual groups enforcing their religious edicts into common law simply because they are majority. Religions that require opposing stances must file for exemptions from laws, and actually get repressed on certain issues. I'm not sure who declared that Hoosiers couldn't buy bottled booze on a Sunday, but it sure is inconvenient to someone who suddenly wants to drown their sorrows and then not get arrested for drunk driving.