I am very sympathetic about what the GOP Congress is trying to do (saving prenatal lives is not done as some grand scheme to control women in general). Other than the exceedingly rare exception for saving the life of the mother, late term abortions morally should be banned (for example, they are banned in Norway and many other progressive parts of Europe). My question is whether this particular legislation is the right strategy (since we know this legislation is not going to pass while Barack Obama is President, absent a majority sufficient to override a veto) and whether this should be an issue dealt with on the individual state level.
Instapundit make the federalist argument (leave it to the individual states to regulate): Elizabeth Price Foley and Glenn's argument here, here and here and Jonathan Alder's take on it, Of course we have the Supreme Court on the cusp of judicially imposing same sex marriage nation wide (does same sex marriage increase abortion--it may). And most state efforts to regulate late term abortion have been stimed by the courts, yet the Supreme Court did say Congress has the power to regulate late term abortion (and Justice Kennedy was reportedly not happy how some of his previous decisions went).
Is there a way Congress can empower the individual states more both politically and in a later Supreme Court review (which will inevitably come if any legislation is passed)?
Instapundit: George Will: Democrats don't want to regulate how babies are treated before they are born, but whoa nelly they are all for intervening after those kids are out of the womb and China is the model Progressives like for controlling pesky religious people and controlling population. How do you think Millennial Progressives are going to balance social programs, by actually paying those benefits out to late baby boomers?
TOM: Men cannot be feminists