I just got finished watching the Truman Show for the first time today.
(I had intended to see it earlier, but on our one day in town, it was
either see a movie or do laundary, and laundary won. :-)
One of the ethical issues that is touched on briefly in the movie, is
whether or not it is "right' to do such a thing. Truman's lover
Sylvia/Lauren forms a campaign against "The Truman Show" on these grounds.
Just before this segment, however, it is revealed that Truman was cast
because he was one of three unwanted pregnancies that happened to be born
at the critical start date. In other words, Truman could have been aborted.
And then it dawns me, even as I am brought to tears. Why *not* do this to
a human being if they would have been aborted anyways? Surely a life at
the utter mercy of a Hollywood producer is better than no life at all?
More importantly, what rights do we really have, if we can all be legally
killed before birth? If we're just at the mercy of our mothers to choose
life or death/non-life, can't our mothers really strike whatever Faustian
bargains in our name that she might wish? After all, if we refuse, we
never exist.
I'm surprised that this debate his never hit home to me in these terms
before, but I am just beside myself. Something to think about though.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"The point of living in a Republic after all, is that we do not live by
majority rule. We live by laws and a variety of isntitutions designed
to check each other." -Andrew Sullivan 01/29/01
