Justice Anthony Kennedy's misguided attempts to "protect" women

I commented earlier on how the Supreme Court of the US banned intact dilation and extraction, aka partial birth abortion. One of the reasons that Justice Anthony Kennedy gave in his majority opinion was that the State had the right to protect women from making an uninformed decision to undergo this procedure. He argued that they would experience regret.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in her dissent, wrote that the answer to this concern was to give women more information. She also wrote:

"Instead, the court deprives women of the right to make an autonomous choice. . . . This way of thinking reflects ancient notions about women's place in the family and under the Constitution -- ideas that have long since been discredited."

Indeed, the only reason to restrict this particular abortion procedure should be that, given the fetus' development at this stage of pregnancy, intact dilation and extraction is the same as murder (a contention which, by the way, I don't agree with). Here, it is not warranted for the State to protect people from themselves.