The standard of “viability” would allow us to kill children after they were born.
“Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated.” – Confucius
It’s easy to tell when someone is losing an argument: they will begin to diverge from the topic at hand, and lead you down various other paths. You’ll chase their white rabbits for as long as they need you to in order for them to escape actual topical debate. That is exactly what the left does on a routine basis. They have no foundation for their political arguments, so they set out their rabbits for us to chase down. Sometimes those rabbits are straw men, sometimes they’re vicious, and personal verbal insults, but they’re always enough to keep us running, they’re always enough to exhaust us.
The left loves to use white rabbits when arguing about abortion, because, once again, they have the losing argument. Liberal actress Lena Dunham recently posted a picture to her Instagram in which she’s holding a baby. This baby is wearing a Wendy Davis tee shirt. The text under the picture reads: “This is Shay. He’s voting Wendy Davis.” Apparently the irony is lost on her. Either that, or she is quite perverse, because according to her deeply held philosophy, baby Shay is just past disposable. But of course, he’s not now, because he’s “viable.”
It is in this “viability” where the abortion argument comfortably rests, as if it has won the game. It’s probably the most common argument I hear regarding abortion: “The infant is not viable inside the mother, because it cannot survive on its own.” This is usually said smugly, as if it is somehow irrefutable, when in reality, it’s the most idiotic argument. Let’s talk viability.
If “viability” is indeed what separates us from those who are terminated on a daily basis, we must first define it. According to the abortion advocates with whom I frequently engage, “viability” means that something can survive on its own, without the help of another person. They argue that if an infant is born prematurely, that if it is born prior to full development, it cannot survive for more than hours without the care of medical professionals. That means that it is not viable, and therefore terminable.
When I engage with those who advocate this argument, I always ask them the same question: “Do you believe it’s acceptable for a women to kill their one year-old child?” They balk, and answer incredulously, telling me that “it’s not the same thing, and you know that!” This is generally followed by a screed of some sort about women’s reproductive freedom, the war on women, and how Rush Limbaugh is a hypocrite–because it’s in liberal programming to insult Rush regardless of the situation.
“Viability” means nothing. When I ask if it would be acceptable for a woman to kill her one year-old, an ideologically consistent answer would be “yes.” Why? A one year-old is not viable; a one year-old cannot survive on its own if left alone. It will certainly take longer to die than a premature infant, but why is the length of time it takes to die what constitutes viability, or lack thereof? Additionally, there are those who are disabled, or who must have around-the-clock care to survive. Are they not viable? They could not survive for more than hours without the care they receive, so if we are staying consistent within the framework of the abortionist argument, they are as non-viable as an infant in the womb. Should we be allowed to off them as well? Following the viability argument, a woman should be able to kill her child up until they’re several years old—at least until they can forage on their own—because without constant care, they would die.
The viability argument is just a cloak for a simpler, but less palatable argument: “I don’t want this baby inside me, so I’m going to kill it.” Roughly 96% of abortions are elective, so in reality, that’s the argument going in. The viability argument has been shown to be unsound, and ridiculously infantile, so that’s all that’s left. So, Lena Dunham, little Shay must have been wanted. How nice of his mother to keep him, then vote for a woman who would give her the right to kill his brother or sister in the womb if she so desired. She sounds like a great lady.