This weenie is perfectly correct on the broader pro-life philosophy but is to Constitution scholarship what Algore is to climate science. Scalia is the best we can get in promoting a pro-life culture. He is perfectly correct on interpretation of the Constitution. The more we try to infer values in the Constitution that aren’t there the more we endorse the efforts of those who would mold the Constitution into a leftist screed.
The Constitution says nothing in particular against abortion; just, as originally written, it said nothing against slavery. Scalia is perfectly correct in interpreting the Constitution as written, it’s the limit of what he can do as a judge and the teachings of the Catholic Church are only tangentially interesting, because our laws are not based on the teachings of any church.
All I expect of the Court is the overturning of the abominable RvW, the eventual protection of all unborn will have to come via a Constitutional amendment - something which already be a reality if we lived in a better society.
I agree with the Justice.
Biological information clearly shows that the child in the womb is a “parasite” - in the classic biology terms.
I believe a child in the womb is not a PERSON until it’s born .. or until it can survive on it’s own outside of the mother.
Scientific advances have made the child in the womb viable much sooner. However, if the mother is killed - the child cannot survive - unless by some miracle, it is removed from the deceased mother immediately.
But .. the child is a human being even before it’s born .. and should be protected.