Why the Pro-Choice 'Viability' Argument is Garbage
One of the most common arguments used by pro-choice activists is that of "viability." The prime factor determining personhood, and therefore terminability, is an infant's capacity to survive outside the womb. For example, an infant born prematurely at 15 weeks cannot survive, and is therefore not viable.
Abortion proponents frequently use "viability" as the defining line between what is and is not life. However, the use of "viability" as a means to determine what's alive and what's not alive brings up a host of other questions.
If someone goes on a vacation to Hawaii, and leaves their one-year-old son home alone for a month, he will die. Does the child's death mean he wasn't viable? He certainly couldn't survive on his own. How long must a child be able to survive outside the womb in order to be labeled viable?
There are individuals who require 24-hour care to survive. Without such care, they will die. Are they not viable?
If a one-year-old, and someone who requires constant medical care are not viable, per the pro-choice lobby's definition of the word, are they terminable? Can one have their son executed by the state if he is too young or too ill to care for himself? Speaking to those who are proudly pro-choice, the intellectually honest answer would be "Yes." Such an argument is merely an extension of viability logic.
Further, "viability" is a developmental argument; one of "might means right." If someone were to plant a flower in their backyard, and water the earth above the seed, a sprout would begin to hatch. As that sprout develops, it would remain underground, slowly inching its way to the surface. What then is the difference between a sprout the day before it breaks the surface of the earth, and the day after? Nothing. It's the same organism, only in a different stage of development; one that can be seen. It is genetically intact and complete regardless of its developmental status. In a similar fashion, an infant inside the womb is no different than one outside the womb, aside from the fact that it can be seen with the naked eye.
Approximately 13,700 infants 21-weeks gestation and older are aborted every year in the United States, according to the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute. For reference, this is an image of Rumaisa Rahman, who was born at 25.6 weeks gestation:
The youngest surviving preemie was James Elgin Gill, who was born at just 21 weeks and five days. If someone killed James Elgin Gill after-birth, they would be tried for murder. However, if Gill's parents had him killed inside the womb, they would be legally protected. Such circumstances have no logical foundation.
Following the developmental argument that is "viability," a toddler is less physically and cognitively developed than a teenager; a teenager is less physically and cognitively developed than a 35-year-old; someone with Down syndrome is simply less cognitively developed than someone without it. Using the logic of viability, anyone who is less developed--either in age, or cognitive ability--is subject to termination by someone older or more advanced than they are.
The viability argument is not only grossly flawed, but morally heinous.