Warren Meyer, over at Coyoteblog.com, has a nice little article on what I find to be the most intellectually bothersome part of the modern Democratic/big-government-liberal plank: the constant tension (shall we call it hypocrisy?) between state interest in virtually all aspects of life, and a small number of seemingly arbitrary ‘sacred cows’ where no interference is allowable, e.g. abortion. He sums it up nicely:

The left pushes constantly for expansion of government regulation into every corner of our lives. They are trying to walk a line, a line so narrow I don’t think it even exists, between there being no state interest in 16 year old girls getting abortions without their parents’ knowledge or consent and there being a strong state interest in breast implants, painkillers, seat belt use, bike helmets, tobacco use, fatty foods, etc. They somehow have to make the case that that a woman is fully able to make decisions about an abortion but is not able to make decisions, without significant government regulation and intervention, about her retirement savings, the wages she accepts for her work, her use of a tanning booth, and her choice of painkillers.

Lest anyone think I’m making an anti-choice argument, here, I’m not; I’m as vehement a proponent of a woman’s right to choose as anyone, but I find the intellecual gyrations required to be both pro-choice on abortion but ‘anti-choice’ on drug use or seatbelts a bit much.