Adiyen’s humble opinion…
If we split ‘Sruti’ into ‘Karma Khandam” and ‘Brahma Khandam’, I do not think any ‘vaidikas’ have abhipraaya bhedam in ‘Karma Khandam’, but for some neo-Hindu groups.
Karma cannot have interpretation because it is an act but the intention with which the karma is (or should be) done can have several interpretations.
Abhipraaya bhedam exists and would exist in ‘Brahma Khandam’ because it is to do with ‘aatmanubhavam’ and just cannot be conditioned by parents or the society we live. I think this is where our ‘praarabhdam’ has its influence.
We are talking about scholarly society that lived thousands of years back wherein this kind of freedom of choice existed. However we all belong to a generation, where there is niether ‘paandityam’ nor ‘shraddhai’.
So we can, at best, tell our children only about what we know, understood, completely convinced ourselves, and keep it open-ended, but can never force them. It would simply not work. And then we should leave them to the refuge of bhagawan.
So adiyen’s viewpoint is that uniform civil code is against individuals’ spiritual inquiry. I think this is the beauty of ‘sanatana dharmam’ and must not become an imposition at all just like some of the ‘avaidika’ religions.