1. To restate your proposition is not to reason. But you know that or should. The word viable does not exist in the constitution in either the Fifth or the Fourteenth Amendments. The existing judicial usurpation of Roe vs. Wade and its progeny are not law, existing or otherwise, any more than Fidel Castro is the legitimate ruler of Cuba by virtue of imposing the rule of the knout and the gun. Roe set aside the laws and law-making powers of fifty states to impose the social policy preferences of the amoral and render moot one hundred fifty years or more of undisturbed legislation prohibiting most abortions in most states and all abortions in many of them. The states only ceded to the federal government limited powers and the powers ceded to the federal courts (see the Tenth Amendment) were much more sharply limited. I have no warrant to impose policy any more than you do but the states, under our constitution's Tenth Amendment do have theat warrant. You simply like the imposed regime of Roe vs. Wade and I do not. The question is constitutionality not my preferences or thine.
2. and 3. You have not answered and merit no reply.