Overturning, or ruling a law (that was legislated from the bench) unconstitutional is NOT legislating from the bench. It's called "doing contitutionally-appropriate judical duties".
They legislated from the bench when they ruled in favor of Roe. Abortion does not require judges to legislate from the bench, it requires that they adhere to the Constitution of the United States in their rulings.
Getting back to Barack. He is in favor of all abortion scenarios including late term abortion. If you are familiar with the mechanics of this process and are comfortable with someone who would support such a thing, then there is not much more that can be said, save for we will all give account for our words and actions.
How about the people you have supported?
Have any of them been successful in overturning legalized abortion as the law of the land?
How many people have you supported that talk the talk, but then fail to walk the walk?
Despite this, did you continue to support these people?
I stated that wrong but I suspect you know what I mean.
I've supported the vermin that say they are opposed to abortion but are not in their deeds. I repent of this and rail against 'em all. Republicrats and Democrans are different means to the same end. The battle is between the powers and principalities versus the people, not partisanship.
I have found that it is better to let the person in question make their viewpoints clear - I don't like simply assuming what the poster thinks, given the anonymous nature of this forum.