找回密码
 FreeOZ用户注册
查看: 2298|回复: 13

About gay marriage - Not for Adam and Steve

[复制链接]
发表于 12-5-2008 09:53:29 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
提示: 作者被禁止或删除, 无法发言

                               
登录/注册后可看大图


When the former Labor prime minister Paul Keating said that "two blokes and a cocker spaniel" don't make a family he was being typically brutal and unfair. The love and commitment between two people of the same sex can be as strong as that between husband and wife.
当前工党总理Paul Keating在谈到同性恋婚姻的时候说道:“两个大男人和一个小狗狗”不可能组织一个家庭。这是典型的残酷态度和不公平的。同性之间的爱可以和丈夫与妻子之间的爱同样的坚强。

Not for nothing has it been said that "greater love has no man than to lay down his life for his friend". Plainly, this was not intended as a reference to conjugal love.
不是说最伟大的爱莫过于“为了朋友可以牺牲生命”。很显然,这并不是指配偶之间的爱。

There is more moral quality in a relationship between two people devoted to each other for decades than in many a short-lived marriage. Still, however deeply affectionate or long lasting it may be, the relationship between two people of the same sex cannot be a marriage because a marriage, by definition, is between a man and a woman.
现实生活中有很多两个人之间的关系维系了几十年,这长过许多短命的婚姻。然而,无论如何同性之间的深深的爱慕不能够因此而结婚,因为,婚姻的定义限定了婚姻是一个男人和一个女人的婚姻。

In defining marriage, some go further and say a marriage must be intended to last for life, to the exclusion of all other sexual partners, and be open to children. The Catholic church, for instance, holds that a marriage doesn't really exist if one of the partners never intended to be faithful or to have children.
在讨论婚姻的概念时,有些人走的更远一些,说婚姻是一种持续终生的关系,这包括所有的性伴侣,并且需要生儿育女。比如天主教徒声称如果其中的一个性伴侣不能够保持忠贞或者生育,这就不能够成为婚姻。

At least in the popular debate, the defining elements of "gay marriage" are never made clear. Are its advocates expecting people who enter into it to be faithful to each other for life, for instance, and do they propose to pass moral judgement against gay partners who can't maintain this ideal?
至少,在目前的一些比较多的辩论中,关于同性婚姻的定义从来没有被明确过。同性婚姻的拥护者们真的期待终身对彼此忠诚么?比如,他们试图挑战那种认为同性伴侣不能够保持这种忠诚的传统观念么?

Or rather, do they think that any relationship that's "special" can be a "marriage" if that's what the partners choose to call it?
亦或是,他们认为如果他们愿意,他们可以把任何“特殊”的关系称之为“婚姻”?

These are not idle questions. To qualify as a de-facto marriage, for instance, a man and a woman must have lived together for at least a year in a genuine domestic arrangement. It's a very different definition to that of the Catholic church but another demonstration that not every relationship is a potential marriage.
这不是随便问问而已,而是因为大多数人都认为:任何现实意义上的婚姻实际上是指一个男人和一个女人必须在一起生活至少一年以上。这个和天主教对于婚姻的定义完全不同,却说明了实际上不是所有的伴侣关系都是天主教所定义的婚姻。

Marriage can mean different things to different people but it can hardly be anything that anyone wants it to be. A relationship between two men or between two women may be every bit as admirable as one between a man and a woman but it isn't the same, and it can't be a marriage however fulfilling and loving it might be.
对于不同的人,婚姻有着不同的定义,也不可能达成一致。两个男人和两个女人之间的伴侣关系可以是和一个男人和一个女人之间的关系同样的令人羡慕,不管他们之间是多么的相爱,他们却不能够结婚。

Let's celebrate all strong relationships, whether they are between a man and a woman or between people of the same sex but let's be careful about describing every lasting sexual bond as a "marriage".
让我们赞美所有的伴侣关系,不管是一个男人和一个女人的伴侣关系还是同性之间的伴侣关系。但是,我们却需要谨慎的不把所有的伴侣关系称为婚姻。

Are people who want to claim the status of marriage also ready for its burdens? "Gay marriage" would mean court-imposed property settlements when partners split. It would mean reduced social security benefits for gay couples. Conscious of the way they have been discriminated against, gay people may not know all the respects in which people can be better off (financially at least) by not being married.
那些想要大声宣布他们的爱情(婚姻)的伴侣们,已经准备好了面对婚姻的这种责任了么?那么”同性婚姻“意味着,当不再是伴侣的时候,法庭会判决分配财产,还意味着对于同性伴侣要减少社会福利待遇。如果不清楚这些财产和社会福利上的区别(与异性婚姻)对待,同性伴侣也许应该知道实际上他们最好在(财产上)独立。

There are strong arguments to end any remaining discrimination against gay people, as even the Anglican archbishop of Sydney has lately recognised. People should not be looked down upon, thought less of, or treated differently because they happen to be gay.
目前有很强烈的舆论支持结束对于同性恋人的各种歧视,人们不应该看不起,或者看轻任何人,仅仅是由于这个人是同性恋。

Gay people are just as capable as anyone else of loyalty, selflessness and the capacity to take the rough with the smooth, the qualities that the establishment of lasting relationships require. Selfishness, pettiness, negativity, hardness of heart and unwillingness to forgive, the characteristics on which relationships founder, are not unknown among gay people either. Regardless of whom it's between, a sexual relationship should be characterised by trust, honesty, maturity and commitment.
同性恋人实际上可以和异性恋或者任何人一样的忠贞的,无私的去维持一种终身伴侣关系。自私,卑鄙,消极,铁石心肠,以及不愿意饶恕这些特点对于同性恋人群也同样不陌生。应该抛弃性别的观念,应该使用信任呢,诚实和和承诺来定义性伴侣关系。

I am not against gay people having solid lasting relationships. I just don't think these can be called "marriages" any more than a rose could be called a gardenia or vice versa notwithstanding that they're both beautiful and sweet scented.
我不反对同性恋者的稳定的长期的伴侣关系。我仅仅是不认为他可以被称为”婚姻“,正如,我们不可以称玫瑰为栀子一样, 尽管他们是一样的美丽和芳馨。

Commitment counts and, for a man and a woman, that's what marriage signifies. In the end, though, the quality of the relationship matters more than what it's called.
承诺对于一个男人和一个女人来说意义重大。最终,我认为,伴侣关系其本身更重要,不管你想用什么来称呼他。




翻译的蹩脚,就当练习翻译技巧了,你可以去看原文以及评论。
原文出自: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2240035.htm

[ 本帖最后由 xblues 于 12-5-2008 06:55 编辑 ]
单选投票, 共有 17 人参与投票
您所在的用户组没有投票权限
回复  

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 12-5-2008 09:59:02 | 显示全部楼层
提示: 作者被禁止或删除, 无法发言
超过300条评论..............建议看看鬼子对于同性婚姻的看法,挺有意思的,这是一个很富有这一的话题,尤其是对宗教人士,信教的鬼子很多。
看看可以了解鬼子的辩论方式和社会观。多看有益。
回复  

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 12-5-2008 10:08:50 | 显示全部楼层
提示: 作者被禁止或删除, 无法发言
的确文章的作者说的是实情。我问过我的几个同性恋鬼子朋友,他们对同性婚姻的看法,实际上他们支持本文作者的看法。

我的这几个朋友都更实际,在西方,由于赡养费用,福利待遇等问题,以及伴侣关系不稳定的因素。目前的关于同性婚姻的相关法律也不健全,结婚并不一定比不结婚在经济意义上有好处,认为怎么别人称呼同性关系无所谓,只要他们自己心里承认就可以了。倒是蛮实际的。

我总是说我是同性婚姻的支持者,但是正如上文作者所说的,我真的清楚婚姻的实质么?相关的问题太复杂了。每当我说:我支持同性婚姻的时候,我其实是指,挽着我爱的人举行婚礼,对大家宣布我们的爱情,让大家分享我们的幸福,仅此而已。 从这个意义上,我支持同性婚姻,并且我要和我爱的人结婚(承诺)。至于其他的,我实在是不在乎,两个人在一起就可以了。
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 02:54:38 | 显示全部楼层
WHAT ABOUT GAY & NEWGAY
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 12:19:59 | 显示全部楼层

回复 #4 flyday 的帖子

回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 12:50:24 | 显示全部楼层
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 12:52:52 | 显示全部楼层
婚姻的法律意义无外乎权利与义务
比如继承权,赡养义务
没有保护的情况下,就是所有人明摆着欺负你。

至于说婚姻中所谓的爱情
不如说是爱情中所谓的婚姻
没有白头到老重要
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 12:59:05 | 显示全部楼层
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 13:00:51 | 显示全部楼层
曾在G吧参加过L的订婚礼,呵呵,去的人大都不认识订婚的两位新人,不过都很真心祝福她们。大家做见证吧,法律的事情,让律师去操心喽。
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 14-5-2008 15:04:37 | 显示全部楼层
Commitment counts and, for a man and a woman, that's what marriage signifies. In the end, though, the quality of the relationship matters more than what it's called.
承诺对于一个男人和一个女人来说意义重大。最终,我认为,伴侣关系其本身更重要,不管你想用什么来称呼他。
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 16-5-2008 19:42:45 | 显示全部楼层
呵呵,我有点不太能理解,可能我没有一点这样的感觉吧。SORRY。不过我还是支持的,相信自己的感觉就好
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 16-5-2008 19:53:26 | 显示全部楼层
原帖由 flyday 于 14-5-2008 01:54 发表
WHAT ABOUT GAY & NEWGAY


得看他们的取向是否一致
回复  

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 16-5-2008 23:19:32 | 显示全部楼层

Gay Marriage: the Impact of the California Case

提示: 作者被禁止或删除, 无法发言
让我们一起关注加利福尼亚这件事的发展,看看到底最后是谁胜利,我相信是GAY

我也是认为法律是否承认不重要,关键是实质上两个人是不是相爱。但是看了这篇文章感觉那个举着牌子的人说的对:
STOP IGNORANCE BEING GAY IS NOT A CHOICE

发向思维,法律不承认,实际上就等于同性伴侣成了二等公民,应该有的权利得不到法律的保护。认为只要自己相爱,法律就不重要了,是自欺欺人,脑袋埋在了沙子里,那么大一个屁股在外边,照样挨打。中国社会不就是一直在边缘化同性恋人群么?北边与阿花的同性恋人群也同样接受这种边缘化的态度,可是这是同性恋人群自己的权利,不争取是得不到的。法律上是需要承认同性婚姻的,但是至于同性伴侣愿不愿意结婚怎是同性伴侣自己的选择。

异性恋的朋友们我问一个问题:加入有一天,法律上说所有异性恋婚姻在法律上都无效了,你会怎么想?

http://www.usnews.com/articles/n ... alifornia-case.html


                               
登录/注册后可看大图


[ 本帖最后由 xblues 于 16-5-2008 20:28 编辑 ]
回复  

使用道具 举报

发表于 5-12-2008 14:03:24 | 显示全部楼层
虫虫,给你看这个
http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/news/20080109.htm

这一对我认识
回复  

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | FreeOZ用户注册

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|FreeOZ论坛

GMT+11, 29-3-2024 12:20 , Processed in 0.059919 second(s), 31 queries , Gzip On, Redis On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表