Well, oddamn, woman! Thanks for finally acknowledging those two statements of yours are contradictory.<quoted text>
STO: "You wrote:
~"Viability of an already born infant is also about POTENTIAL, and when doctors see a potential for that born infant to survive with medical help..."
In a prior post, you said, and I quoted you ver batim:
"That's not the same as viability of a newborn infant, because the newborn infant is already ~outside of the womb~, so it would be about potential of the newborn infant to survive without medical help."
^^^These two statements are contradictory.^^^"
The first was misspoken and I clarified, the word (without) was inadvertantly left out.
Whether you mispoke or were confused, I appreciate you admitting you made a mistake. So we can put that whole deal about you making it the reader's fault (that would be me) to rest.
Now, how about these statements you made:
lil Lily wrote:
"If a [fetus] is viable, then once removed from it's NLS (the womb), and helped with ALS, it will be able to survive and continue to survive on ALS."
If a [born infant] is viable then, even if it's on ALS for a time, it will eventually be able to survive without it."
Look at your statement number 1. If a fetus is removed from the womb and helped with ALS it IS AN INFANT, BORN INFANT,
If a BORN INFANT is on ALS it is still a BORN INFANT.
There is NO DIFFERENCE
Can you agree that there is no difference?