Except that Scalia would have supported abortion if an abortion amendment was legitimately passed. He would have been personally opposed—I think—but he would have stood for the rule of law. As I understand it, he saw the US Constitution as a legal contract between the people and government. One doesn’t just change the terms of a contract without following the rules. To do otherwise—even if the cause is just—tears apart the legal framework that holds diverse people together in a civil society.
“One doesn’t just change the terms of a contract without following the rules.”
Liberals see it differently, in their view the constitution says what they believe, the actual wording exists only for them to misinterpret in any way they please while any part that agrees with their ideas is cast in stone and can never be tampered with...unless the liberals change their mind of course. That is why they hate Scalia.