We are speaking of your hypothetical right to protect the life of your child, as an individual. We are not speaking of the right of pro-life people to vote their conscience and try to eliminate abortion. They have that right, provided their goal is to serve the best interests of society -- which is to protect the individual's freedoms. If their goal is selfish, and infringes unjustly on the rights of individual members of this society, then the laws they enact should be stricken down. They do, however, have the right to try to find a way to achieve their goals within that framework, or, should there be enough pro-life people in the country, to change the Constitution and to change the goals of our society. You, as an individual, do not have the right to force your wife to surrender her freedom for your selfish desires.
Come to think of it, the child does not have the right to force the mother to surrender her freedom for its selfish desires, either. In essence, it is a question of who has first claim to sovereignty over the body in question, and the answer must always be the woman whose body it is. Not the parents of the minor children (who are enslaving their daughter in order to protect their grandchild -- hardly a moral stance) nor the husband who impregnated her, nor the child who parasitizes her. It is her body, it is her freedom; all the rest of you are infringing on it, and society has the right to stop you.
As to whether the right should be determined by states or not, take that up with the Supreme Court. My premise is that government, state or federal, has the right to limit your ability to limit the rights of others for selfish reasons.