The Baseless Argument of Viability & The Definition of Life

The liberal narrative on viability of the unborn child focuses on living outside of the womb without uterine nutritional support. What a totally really, stupid premise!

First, if anyone is placed in an environment that only provides oxygen without food will not remain viable for very long, born or unborn.

To ensure a new born remains viable requires that the child continue to be fed. While in the womb, if left un-assaulted, it will have all the nourishment it needs to continue to grow. Only two things can interrupt viability---a miscarriage or an abortion.

The notion of viability cannot be confined to having the post-uterine ability to live without uterine support. Why? Because true viability has nothing to do with living outside of the womb. It’s about being viable inside the womb.

As such viability begins at conception in a protected environment of life and nutrition. It's time for our nation to settle the question both scientifically as well as constitutionally. America needs a Definition of Life Bill passed and codified into law. Without it, the Supreme Court for the United States as well as legislatures across the country do not have a standard from which to interpret the right to life clause contained in the 14th Amendment. Likewise, how can they do so without a Definition of Life from which to determine and adjudicate what constitutes a human life? Feel free to thoughtfully review the excerpt from the Bill posted on The Definition of Life page taken from the original draft and tell your representatives to take immediate action using science as the arbiter.