The Last Girl (The Dominion Trilogy, #1) The Last Girl discussion


37 views
Was the government right?

Comments Showing 1-7 of 7 (7 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Ed (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ed Morawski If all women suddenly became infertile, would the government be justified in securing all young women to try and ensure the survival of the human race?

In the book you certainly would not agree with their methods but can you argue not letting women run free to be at the mercy of rapists and slavers?

I think this moral dilemma is what makes the book interesting.


message 2: by [deleted user] (new)

No i disagree with the statement that the government is write in taking young girls and holding them against thier will to experiment on to see if the human race can be saved. In this book the girls were taken from thier families, abused, they had no contact with loved ones and were subject to rape and abuse from unscrupulous guards, and at thier mercy. The end does not justify the means in this case. There was no excuse for the loss of humanity that the government showed these girls , the very people that they should have been protecting.Society had broke down with the methods that the government was using in this story. There was no democracy, no fair form of government.


message 3: by [deleted user] (new)

Please excuse any typing errors in my post.


Lizzie I agree with Ann. If the government creates a shortage then a black market comes into being. In this instance it degraded to slavery and rape being common. The government in this book were just ad guilty as the slavers they just used experimentation with the goal of continuing the human race as their excuse.

At any time where protection requires that all freedoms, rights and protections of the individuals of a group or class are dismissed in favor of the government having complete control it is wrong.

Consider examples where it has happened to other groups or classes by our government. From slavery to Japanese Americans to the native Indians, our government provided compelling reasons that we now recognize as being morally wrong. They were not medical but they were seen as survival issues.

What came to mind as I was reading it, since men provide the gene that determines gender their scientific reasoning seemed faulty to begin with.


message 5: by Ed (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ed Morawski It would seem you both missed the second line of my original post: 'In the book you certainly would not agree with their methods but can you argue not letting women run free to be at the mercy of rapists and slavers?'

If none of the abuse took place, would the government then be justified in hoarding fertile women to save the human race?

If your answer is no - then the human race just dies out?


Lizzie I was addressing your first paragraph. My point was it would be no different from now as to the risk to women if the government hadn't made women an unobtainable item. And yes even if the government thought the human race would end I dont think it is their right. Part of my reason is that from the content of the book they didn't have the answer to the problem and were no.closer to it. We know from animals that breeding in captivity is more difficult


message 7: by [deleted user] (new)

NOOOOO They were not right. They shouldn't have lied to the girls or imprisoned them like that. D:


back to top