You're right, of course I realize it. Ayakaneo was trying to negate what I had given her from the RvW decision in answer to her question, as though it was JUST a footnote from a medical book. When it wasn't just that, it was THE specific medical definition accepted and used by the SC in it's decision about "viability".<quoted text>
I think she does realize. And the fact is, it doesn't matter where it came from. It's legal precedent.
I'm surprised at you.
It not only proved it was a medical definition that included "albeit with artificial aid", but it stated right in what I provided to Ayakaneo, that it said viability could be as early as 24 weeks.
I answered her question, gave the proof FROM the RvW decision, and that should have ended that.
Except it didn't. Not for idiots who think the definition RvW used coming from a medical book negates it all.