評論
打印
I want to start with a thought experiment.
我想以一個思維實驗開始我今天的演講。
Suppose I told you that I'm imagining an activity that takes place between consenting adults, doesn't hurt anyone, and results in a great deal of pleasure for the people involved-and that's all that you know about the activity that I'm imagining.
此刻我們來設想某種行為，它發(fā)生在自愿的成年人之間，對參與者無害，并且可以給參與者帶來極大的愉悅--我只給你以上的幾條信息。
Given that information, it sounds pretty good.
那么，基于以上這些信息，這種行為聽起來似乎很不錯。
Suppose I fill in the picture a bit more and tell you that not only does it result in pleasure for the people involved, but it's an avenue of communication and a source of deep meaning in their lives.
假設我在這個情境下再加點東西，我會告知你這種行為不但會給參與者愉悅，并且它是參與者之間溝通交流的渠道，甚至是他們整個生命意義的源泉。
And, again, that's all you know about the activity that I'm imagining.
我們再次僅就以上這些信息來判斷整個行為本身。
Given that information, it sounds great-the kind of thing we'd want to encourage.
聽起來也很棒，使我們要積極鼓勵的那種行為。
But, of course, when I fill in the picture a bit more, and tell you that the adults in question are two men or two women, and the activity is some kind of sexual activity, suddenly people are not so keen on it anymore.
那么如果我再加入更多的判斷條件呢？比如我會告訴你，行為的參與者是兩個成年男子，或兩個成年女性，而行為本身與性有關。突然之間，很多人就開始不那么感冒了。
In fact, not only would many people condemn it, some would call it a moral abomination.
事實上，很多人不但會去譴責這種行為，甚至會稱之為"令人憎惡的道德惡行"。
Consider the fact that right now there are thousands of people across the world having sex.
我們來想象一下這個事實：就在此時此刻，整個世界上有成千上萬的人正在進行著性行為。
It's kind of disconcerting when you think about it.
光是想到這點就有點讓人不好意思。
Especially when you realize you're sitting here listening to me.
特別是你們現在都在正襟危坐地聽我演講。
Some of those people are with partners of the same race; some of them are with partners of a different race.
有些人的性伴侶是和自己相同的種族，有些是不同種族。
Some of them are with partners of the same age; some of them are in what we call "May-December relationships."
有些人的性伴侶和自己年紀相當，有些則是老少配。
Some of them have known each other a long time; some of them met last night on the Internet.
有些人和性伴侶之間相識已久，有些則是從網上聯(lián)系到的一夜情。
Some of them are in loving, nurturing relationships; some of them are in abusive relationships.
有些人之間有著甜美溫馨的愛情，有些人之間則是施暴與受害的關系。
Now those facts all have varying moral significance.
以上這些全部有著各種各樣的道德含義。
But when I tell you that some of these people are with partners of the same sex and some of these people are with partners of the other sex, that fact seems to take on a significance all its own.
但如果告訴你，這些人當中有些人的性伴侶是自己的同性，有些人是自己的異性時，這條消息本身，就足以挑起強烈的倫理思考了。
And the question I want to explore tonight is "why?"
而我今晚在此想要探尋的問題正是--為何如此？
What's morally wrong with homosexuality, if anything, and if nothing, what's all the fuss about?
同性戀在道德上有什么錯？而如果有錯，或是沒錯，這么多的爭吵和爭論又有何意義？
And the way I'm going to do this is I am going to look at some of the most common arguments against homosexuality and subject them to philosophical scrutiny.
而我解決這個疑問的辦法，就是去討論一下一些常見的反對同性戀的論點和論辯，從哲學上去細細審視它們。
It sounds fancier than it is; really, we're just going to look at these arguments, see what they are, see if they work.
聽上去這是個不錯的做法。我們將剖析這些論點，看看它們是什么，是否成立。
Before I get to the arguments, there are a few preliminary things I want to get out of the way.
在我對它們進行探討之前，我們做點基礎工作。
We're talking about homosexuality tonight. What is that?
今晚我們將探討同性戀這個話題，那么什么是同性戀？
A lot of people like to make a distinction between homosexual orientation and homosexual activity-homosexual orientation, being attracted to people of the same sex; homosexual activity, engaging in some kind of romantic activity with people of the same sex.
很多人喜歡把同性戀性取向和同性戀行為加以區(qū)分：同性戀性取向是情感上受到相同性別的人的吸引，而同性戀行為是在性的方面和相同性別的人進行親密的互動。
Like many such distinctions, this one is both useful and problematic.
跟很多類似的區(qū)分方法一樣，這種區(qū)分方法既有利也有弊。
