Isn't it time to define life in terms of substantive viability?
I don't think we can go backwards now after Roe V. Wade and define life as starting at conception - even though technically it probably does. But we have to do something about partial birth abortion or anything close to inhumane treatment of innocent victims. I think it's time to introduce a serious idea like substantive viability - anything with a heartbeat. The heartbeat defines life more than anything and the lack thereof - death. That leaves room for prevention and termination up to a point that I think most people can agree is even humane or semi-acceptable. I'm pro life but I think we need to find common ground stop keep it from being such a politically hot issue. Even if new pro life supreme court justices are selected - I think they should bring this idea into the decision process. Any thoughts?
Substantive viability would be separate and distinct from "independent viability" - which is a different issue really, if you look at anyone on short term life support - they still have all rights afforded to a living human. I'm trying to get at a humane cut off that stops the termination of life with a beating heart, which to me is inhumane.