In my opinion, there has been no film (or book, or article for that matter) which has so thoroughly exposed how polarized the "debate" over abortion is in this country as Citizen Ruth.Why am I bringing this up now, 12 years after the film made it's debut?
Well, mainly because A.O. Scott, the film critic for The New York Times, takes a look back at the film in a short video review that's up on the Times web site today. Scott says he thinks it's one of the best films ever made about "culture wars."
It's well-worth seeing. And so is the film itself.
Watching this film reminds me of how easily we can fall prey to being part of the problem if we don't resolutely continue making more cogent arguments to the general public.
Our strongest message in 2008 is that "Women have abortions for many different reasons. Some of those decisions may not seem right to some people, but even if we disagree, it is better if each woman is able to make her own decision."
Ambivalence is the defining term about where this country is on the issue of abortion. Our collective goal in 2008 is to affirm that and to help the country move beyond attempts to criminalize abortion or ban it outright.
One of the reasons that this presidential election is of such great importance is that the Supreme Court is in play - the future direction of the Court and of this country is at stake - which means so are our personal freedoms.
Citizen Ruth is one of those rare films that makes you think - in this case of where we've been and where we're headed - and of what's at stake.
2 comments:
I totally thought the same thing when I saw this on the review on the Times so I am glad you wrote about it. I think I am going to watch the movie this weekend as it has been awhile since I have seen it.
Thanks for mentioning "Citizen Ruth" which I missed. Will put it on my Netflix list.
Post a Comment