Sadly, as far as I can see, there's nothing specific in the US constitution about abortion. It's an interpretation thing. A right that was construed by SCOTUS from supportive-seeming text, including a supposed right to privacy, defined in Roe.
Right now, due to McConnell's cheating, there are the votes for a GOP interpretation of the constitution.
These are the same sorts of Justices who interpret the meaning of the second amendment as essentially unconditional in spite of the militia caveat. They call their interpretations original. I call it a stone tablets view of justice. That is, a view that some principles are permanent.
I agree that some of the problems the US has are cultural. But the constitution doesn't solve them and ensures the government is equally unable to do so. And so they remain problems. eg the problem of mass-casualty, gun-related deaths in the US is easily soluble, but the constitution, as interpreted by GOP-SCOTUS, won't allow it to be fixed. A principle defined when arms were muskets doesn't work so well when folks have assault weapons; and as any fool can see, the police and the army long since took the role of the militia. The second amendment wants retiring. But that's an impossible dream in America.
Unfortunately for the stone tablets view, and the peoples who abide by the notion, the world changes regardless of any laws people write. Which is why the Ten Commandments look primitive today. And it is why the constitution is causing the very problems its authors feared. It denies governments the ability to solve the country's problems. And so they fester.
If some white people want to live in an all-white country, I say let them live together in some place. Let's call it Montana. Let them secede. Let them have all sorts of rules about guns, abortion, skin colour, religion, science, the evils of government and liberal ideas etc. And then see how well they enjoy it.
My bet is, they'd kill each other after a short while.
| 