As described earlier (e76) there should be regular committees who rewrite the rules and regulations to reflect the changes of thinking of the time, what was considered moral or scientific fact 40 years ago is very different to now.
The other time it would be necessary is if an individual calls into question a rule or procedure, in this case a new debate committee will be formed and the reasoning behind the old rule will be reviewed and discussions with those involved.
Each debate on changing the regulation needs a 2/3 majority for or against if this doesn’t occur the group is expanded until a consensus is voted on.
Ultimately if the issue is consistently undecided it will involve the entire community at which point if threatening to destabilize the community into camps there will be a think tank on a better third solution and the elected official in charge will make a decision with the larger majority.
Disputes of this nature should be avoided from the outset by not writing or creating regulations that divide opinions so radically.