Yes, but the ruling party mostly hates the creator and think the founding documents are old-fashioned without modern relevance, and which only belong in museums, not in courtrooms.
The Founding Fathers didn't put in anything about abortion and perverted "marriage" because it was so unthinkable in those days that they didn't think it was necessary.
In a country operating under the rule of law, that is based on courts enforcing a written Constitution restraining the legislative branch, there is a certain minimum requirement the judicial branch when enforcing the Constitution against the legislature. The judicial branch must clearly identify the language in the written Constitution it finds operative and is enforcing, and then explain to the legislature the reasoning that connects that language to the particular decision it actually reaches. This both limits the judicial branch to the actual enforcement of the language of the written constitution, and permits the legislature and citizenry to understand how the Constitution has been enforced, so as to understand how it will be enforced in future cases.
Roe v. Wade failed to meet this very minimal requirement. Basing its decision on a “right of privacy” nowhere actually articulated in the Consitution, the operative sentence of that decision states: “This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”
This holding is (a) not actually rooted in any language of the constitution, (b) fails to adequately explain how the Court got from whatever it is in the Constitution it actually based its decision on to the actual decision, and (c) provided no real guidance to allow the citizenry to understand how the holding would be applied in the future.
Under our constitutional system, the general power of making law it vested in the legislature, but in Roe v. Wade the Court arrogated that power to itself without really explaining why the Constitution provided for this result.