I think this is the best answer and I take it from The Constitution Party Platform so it's not my words by rather I'm stating the source "The right to life should not be made dependent upon a vote of a majority of any legislative body." In other words my right to live or die should not be dependent upon the federal, state, or local government. Any of the three wishing to do such would be in violation of my civil rights and as such an interest to the USSC and their duty to defend my life.
Here's what I like so much about Judge Roberts. What you are saying I agree with, however it's up to the legislature and the people to enact laws that implement the view you so correctly state. It's not up to the courts to legislate from the bench.
Yes, we ought to have constitutional amendments that outlaw abortion, and perhaps even doctor assisted suicide. Absent those amendments, those issues are to be reserved to the states. I would vehemently oppose a Supreme Court ruling that outlawed abortion since there is no federal authority for governing abortion (which is why Roe vs. Wade was such a terrible decision). I would wholeheartedly support a constitutional amendment banning abortion.
As I noted earlier, I'm in favor of what President Bush has called for, judges who strictly interpret the constitution and do not legislate from the bench. Activist judges are wrong, no matter what their view.