"We argue that prior to viability the fetus isn't a separate lifeform."
FoLLoW tHe SciENcE!!! SCREEEEEE!!!!!
Except when it comes to the most barbaric practice known to mankind. Only a science denier would state that an unborn child is not a "separate lifeform". btw- I want brownie points for not calling you things like "imbecile" and "moron", because that statement is so unbelievably ignorant, it hurts my brain.
An unborn human being IS a "separate lifeform", with its own DNA, its own blood supply, and in half the instances, a different gender from its mother. That unborn human being is a *dependent* lifeform, which is a world of difference from the anti-scientific statement you made.
"We argue that prior to viability . . . "
So then you also argue that until that born child can take care of itself, it is ok to murder it? Take a full term baby, lie it down on the floor moments after birth, and tell me just how "viable" it is. IN BOTH INSTANCES, that baby is dependent on its mother for life.
At the moment of conception, that is the first stage in the life of that human being, and from that moment until the day that person dies, they are in different stages of development. Using your definition of "viability", all elderly people should start worrying about what your next move is. And that is not hyperbole, as other human beings are the carbon that liberals want to reduce.