I've mistaken nothing. Just answer the question without another dodge.....<quoted text>
You are misunderstanding or mistaking what's been said by me and others, Doc,
Of what relevance is any other defintion of viability to the issue of abortion if Roe v Wade established legal precedent for the definition of viability ?
Are you telling me a physician can ignore the court established legal definition of viability and use a contradictory medical one ? Even if there were one ?
That's your MO.....you claim to lose interest in conversations as soon as you realize you have no logical response.and don't seem to be in any hurry to actually do anything about it except claim, "I'm right you're wrong,[/QUOUTE]
It's not a "claim"....it's a fact. I AM right and you ARE wrong.
Fascinating dynamic ain't it ?
[QUOTE]you're weak, I'm strong, blah, blah, blah." I've lost interest in this conversation since you seem to want to confuse legal and medical terms.
I've confused nothing. In fact the RvW court absolutely DID use an existing MEDICAL definition of viability when they established precedent for it's LEGAL definition. Even your PC colleague Conservative Democrat acknowledged this ( you wanna see his post ?). The fact is there is NO medical definition of viability that defines it exclusively WITHOUT medical assistance......NONE !
When the SC set legal precedent for the definition of viability they weren't usurping physicians authority in determining medical procedures you dolt. What they WERE doing however is establishing the legal parameters by which those determinations could be made.AND you don't seem to have any issue with politicians determining medical procedures rather than the physicians and patients involved.
A physician cannot legally make a determination of non viability that ignores the existence of available medical technology.
You chewed on nothing. You don't have the capability of understanding even the most basic of concepts.There, done chewing. Had to spit it out.
And that's not even what I asked you to chew on.......
What I asked you to chew on was this....and you ignored it....conveniently.....
How can 24 weeks be the point at which a preemie has a chance to REACH viability ? If it has not yet reached viability that would mean it is not yet viable....and we know by definition a non viable preemie cannot survive NO MATTER WHAT medical assistance is provided.
Chew on THAT.