新世紀博士生綜合英語Unit-6-Death-and-Justice課文及譯文

1、新世紀博士生綜合英語Unit-6-Death-and-Justice課文及譯文Unit 6：Death and Justice How Capital Punishment Affirms LifeBy Edward I. Koch死亡與司法死刑如何肯定生命Edward I. Koch December a man named Robert Lee Willie, who had been convicted of raping and murdering an eighteen-year-old woman, was executed in the Louisiana state priso

2、n. In a statement issued several minutes before his death, Mr. Willie said: “Killing people is wrong It makes no difference whether its citizens, countries, or governments. Killing is wrong.” Two weeks later in South Carolina, an admitted killer named Joseph Carl Shaw was put to death for murdering

3、two teenagers. In an appeal to the governor for clemency, Mr. Shaw wrote: “Killing was wrong when I did it. Killing was wrong when you do it. I hope you have the courage and moral strength to stop the killing.”去年12月，一個名叫羅伯特.李.威利的罪犯在路易斯安那州的監(jiān)獄中被處決，罪名是強奸和謀殺一名18歲的女子。在其死亡前幾分鐘發(fā)表的一份聲明中，威利先生說：“殺人是錯誤的. . 無論是

4、公民、國家，還是政府，都沒有區(qū)別。殺人是不對的”。兩周后在南卡羅來納州，一個名為約瑟夫.卡爾.肖的殺人犯因為殺害兩名青少年被處死。在上訴到州長請求寬恕時，肖先生說：“當我殺人時殺人是錯誤的。當你殺人時殺人也是錯誤的。我希望你有勇氣和道德力量來阻止殺戮?！?is a curiosity of modern life that we find ourselves being lectured on morality by cold-blooded killers. Mr. Willie previously had been convicted of aggravated rape, aggrav

5、ated kidnapping, and the murders of a Louisiana deputy and a man from Missouri. Mr. Shaw committed another murder a week before the two for which he was executed, and admitted mutilating the body of the fourteen-year-old girl he killed. I cant help wondering what prompted these murderers to speak ou

6、t against killing as they entered the death-house door. Did their newfound reverence for life stem from the realization that they were about to lose their own冷血的殺人犯對我們進行道德說教，這真是現(xiàn)代社會的一件奇事。威利先生之前已經(jīng)犯有惡性強奸罪、惡性綁架罪和謀殺一名路易斯安那州副州長和一名密蘇里州人的謀殺罪。肖先生在殺害致其被處死的兩個人的一周前，還進行了另一起謀殺，他承認肢解了他所殺害的14歲女孩的身體。我不禁要問，是什么原因促使這些

7、兇手在走入鬼門關(guān)的時候發(fā)表反對殺人的言論。他們重新發(fā)現(xiàn)對生命的尊重是源于意識到即將失去自己的生命了嗎？ is indeed precious, and I believe the death penalty helps to affirm this fact. Had the death penalty been a real possibility in the minds of these murderers, they might well have stayed their hand. They might have shown moral awareness before their

8、 victims died, and not after. Consider the tragic death of Rosa Velez, who happened to be home when a man named Luis Vera burglarized her apartment in Brooklyn. “Yeah, I shot her,” Vera admitted. “She knew me, and I knew I wouldnt go to the chair.”生命無疑是寶貴的，我相信死刑可以肯定這一事實。如果這些殺人犯腦子里真想到過死刑的話，他們就可能會手下留情

9、，就應該會在受害者死亡之前而不是之后表現(xiàn)出道德良知?？紤]羅莎.貝萊斯的悲慘死亡，當一個名為路易斯.維拉的人在她布魯克林的公寓內(nèi)盜竊時，她碰巧回家。 “是的，我射殺了她，”維拉承認?！八J識我，并且我知道我不會被處死刑?！?my twenty-two years in public service, I have heard the pros and cons of capital punishment expressed with special intensity. As a district leader, councilman, congressman, and mayor, I hav

10、e represented constituencies generally thought of as liberal. Because I support the death penalty for heinous crimes of murder, I have sometimes been the subject of emotional and outraged attacked by voters who find my position reprehensible or worse. I have listened to their ideas. I have weighed t

11、heir objections carefully. I still support the death penalty. The reasons I maintain my position can be best understood by examining the arguments most frequently heard in opposition.在我二十多年的公共服務期間，我聽過關(guān)于死刑利弊的種種表達。作為一個選區(qū)的領導人、議會議員、國會議員和市長，我代表了普遍被認為是自由派的選民。因為我支持對十惡不赦的謀殺判處死刑，我有時是選民情緒和憤怒的攻擊對象，他們覺得我的立場應該受到

12、攻擊或者更糟。我聽取了他們的想法，仔細權(quán)衡了他們的反對意見，但仍然支持死刑。我堅持自己立場的原因，可以通過剖析最常聽到的反對觀點來解釋。 1. The death penalty is “barbaric.” Sometimes opponents of capital punishment horrify with tales of lingering death on the gallows, of faulty electric chairs, or of agony in the gas chamber. Partly in response to such protests, sev

13、eral states such as North Carolina and Texas switched to execution by lethal injection. The condemned person is put to death painlessly, without ropes, voltage, bullets, or gas. Did this answer the objections of death penalty opponents Of course not. On June 22, 1984, the New York Times published an

14、 editorial that sarcastically attacked the new “hygienic” method of death by injection, and stated that “execution can never be made humane through science.” So its not the method that really troubles opponents. Its the death itself they consider barbaric.5. 原因1：死刑是“野蠻的”。有時候，絞刑架上凌遲的講述、故障死刑電椅上的講述、或在毒

15、氣室中臨死掙扎的講述使得死刑反對者更害怕。在一定程度上是為了響應這樣的抗議，北卡羅萊納州和得克薩斯州等幾個州改為注射毒針來執(zhí)行死刑。判刑的人被無痛苦地殺死，沒有繩索、電壓、子彈或氣體。這就回答了死刑反對者的異議了嗎？當然沒有。1984年6月22日，紐約時報發(fā)表了一篇社論，諷刺性地攻擊了新的“衛(wèi)生”的注射死亡方法，并指出“科學從來不能使死刑變得仁慈”。所以真正困擾反對者的不是方法，而是他們認為死亡本身是野蠻的。, capital punishment is not a pleasant topic. However, one does not have to like the death pen

16、alty in order to support it any more than one must like radical surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy in order to find necessary these attempts at curing cancer. Ultimately, we may learn how to cure cancer with a simple pill. Unfortunately, the day has not yet arrived. Today we are faced with the choi

17、ce of letting the cancer spread or trying to cure it with the methods available, methods that one day will almost certainly be considered barbaric. But to give up and do nothing would be far more barbaric and would certainly delay the discovery of an eventual cure. The analogy between cancer and mur

18、der is imperfect, because murder is not the “disease” we are trying to cure. The disease is injustice. We may not like the death penalty, but it must be available to punish crimes of cold-blooded murder, cases in which any other form of punishment would be inadequate and, therefore, unjust. If we cr

19、eate a society in which injustice is not tolerated, incidents of murderthe most flagrant form of injusticewill diminish.誠然，死刑是不愉快的話題。然而，正如一個人不必喜歡根治性手術(shù)、放療或化療，以便找到治療癌癥的必要嘗試；一個人也沒必要為了支持死刑而喜歡死刑。最終，我們可能學會如何用簡單的藥丸治愈癌癥。不幸的是，這一天還沒有來到?，F(xiàn)在，我們面臨著選擇讓癌細胞擴散，還是選擇試圖用現(xiàn)有的方法治愈它?，F(xiàn)有方法最終幾乎肯定會被認為是野蠻的。但放棄，或什么也不做將更為野蠻，肯定會延遲最

20、終治愈方法的發(fā)現(xiàn)。癌癥和謀殺之間的比喻是不完美的，因為謀殺不是我們試圖治愈的“疾病”。這種疾病是不公正。因此，我們可能不喜歡死刑，但必須用死刑來懲罰冷血殺手的謀殺，在這些案件中任何其他形式的懲罰是不夠的和不公正的。如果我們構(gòu)建一個不能容忍不公正的社會，謀殺這種最臭名遠揚的不公正形式將會減少。 2. No other major democracy uses the death penalty. No other major democracyin fact, few other countries of any descriptionare plagued by a murder rate s

21、uch as that in the United States. Fewer and fewer Americans can remember the days when unlocked doors were the norm and murder was a rare and terrible offense. In America the murder rate climbed 122 percent between 1963 and 1980. During the same period, the murder rate in New York increased by almos

22、t 400 percent, and the statistics are even worse in many other cities. A study at MIT showed that based on 1970 homicide rates a person who lived in a large American city ran a greater risk of being murdered than an American soldier in World War Two ran of being killed in combat. It is not surprisin

23、g that the laws of each country differ according to differing conditions and traditions. If other countries had our murder problem, the cry for capital punishment would be just as loud as it is here. And I dare say that any other major democracy where 75 percent of the people supported the death pen

24、alty would soon enact it into law.原因2、沒有其他主要的民主國家使用死刑。沒有其他主要的民主國家，事實上是其他任何描述的國家，都沒有美國的謀殺率高。越來越少的美國人記得不鎖門是一種習慣，謀殺是一種罕見的、可怕的罪行的時代。1963年和1980年間，美國的謀殺率上升了122。同一時期，紐約的謀殺率上升了近400，其他許多城市的統(tǒng)計則更糟糕。麻省理工學院的一項研究表明，根據(jù)1970年謀殺率，一個住在美國大城市的人被謀殺的風險，要比在二戰(zhàn)時美國士兵在戰(zhàn)斗中被打死的風險大。依據(jù)不同的條件和傳統(tǒng)，每個國家的法律也不同這并不奇怪。如果其他國家存在我們的謀殺問題，死刑的呼聲

25、會同樣響亮。我敢說，有75的人支持死刑的任何其他主要民主國家將會盡快將死刑寫入法律。 3. An innocent person might be executed by mistake. Consider the work of Hugo Adam Bedau, one of the most implacable foes of capital punishment in this country. According to Mr. Bedau, it is “false sentimentality to argue that the death penalty should be ab

26、olished because of the abstract possibility that an innocent person might be executed.” He cites a study of the seven thousand executions in this country from 1892 to 1971, and concludes that the record fails to show that such cases occur. The main point, however, is this. If government functioned o

27、nly when the possibility of error didnt exist, government wouldnt function at all. Human life deserves special protection, and one of the best ways to guarantee that protection is to assure that convicted murderers do not kill again. Only the death penalty can accomplish this end. In a recent case i

28、n New Jersey, a man named Richard Biegenwald was freed from prison after serving eighteen years for murder; since his release he has been convicted of committing four murders. A prisoner named Lemuel Smith, who, while serving four life sentences for murder (plus two life sentences for kidnapping and

29、 robbery) in New Yorks Green Haven Prison, lured a woman corrections officer into the chaplains office and strangled her. He then mutilated and dismembered her body. An additional life sentence for Smith is meaningless. Because New York has no death penalty statute, Smith has effectively been given

30、a license to kill.原因3、一個無辜的人可能會被錯誤地處死。考慮雨果.亞當.貝多的著作，他是美國最堅決的死刑反對者之一。根據(jù)貝多先生的觀點，因可能誤殺無辜這種抽象的可能性而廢除死刑的主張是虛假的感情用事。他引用了一項關(guān)于1892年到1971年間美國的7000例執(zhí)行死刑的研究，并得出該項研究并不能表明這些案例的發(fā)生。然而，主要的一點正是如此。如果政府只在不存在錯誤可能性的時候發(fā)揮作用時，那么政府將不會發(fā)揮任何作用。人的生命值得特別保護，而保證這種保護的最佳方式之一是保證殺人犯不再殺人。只有死刑可以做到這一點。最近在新澤西州的一個案件中，一個名叫Richard Biegenwald

31、的男子因謀殺而服刑十八年后被釋放；自從被釋放，他已經(jīng)又被控訴犯了四起謀殺罪。一個名為萊繆爾.史密斯的囚犯，因謀殺罪被判四次終身監(jiān)禁（加上因綁架和搶劫被判處的兩次終身監(jiān)禁），在紐約的綠島監(jiān)獄服刑期間，將一名女勞教官誘騙到牧師辦公室，將其扼死，并肢解了她的尸體。再加上一個終身監(jiān)禁對史密斯來說已經(jīng)沒有意義。因為紐約沒有死刑法規(guī)，實際上已經(jīng)給了史密斯一個殺人執(zhí)照。 the problem of multiple murder is not confined to the nations penitentiaries. In 1981, ninety-one police officers were k

32、illed in the line of duty in this country. Seven percent of those arrested in the cases that have been solved had a previous arrest for murder. In New York City in 1976 and 1977, eighty-five persons arrested for homicide. Six of these individuals had two previous arrests for murder, and one had four

33、 previous murder arrests. During the two years the New York police were arresting for murder persons with a previous arrest for murder on the average of one every eight and a half days. This is not surprising when we learn that in 1975, for example, the median time served in Massachusetts for homici

34、de was less than two and a half years. In 1976 a study sponsored by the Twentieth Century Fund found that the average time served in the United States for first-degree murder is ten years. The median time served may be considerably lower.但多重謀殺的問題并不僅僅局限于國家監(jiān)獄。1981年，在美國有91名警察在執(zhí)行任務的時候被殺害。在已經(jīng)破獲的案件中，7%的被捕

35、者之前都曾因謀殺而被逮捕過。在紐約，1976年和1977年有85人因涉嫌殺人被捕，其中,6個人之前曾因謀殺罪被逮捕過兩次，其中1名之前曾因謀殺罪被逮捕過四次。在這兩年紐約警察逮捕的殺人犯中，平均每八天半就會有一個殺人犯之前曾因謀殺而被逮過。當我們了解這個事實：例如，1975年，馬薩諸塞州殺人犯的平均服刑時間不足兩年半；就不會感到奇怪。1976年，由二十世紀基金贊助的一項研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，美國一級謀殺罪的平均服刑時間是十年。平均服刑時間可能會更低。 4. Capital punishment cheapens the value of human life. On the contrary, it ca

36、n be easily demonstrated that the death penalty strengthens the value of human life. If the penalty for rape were lowered, clearly it would signal a lessened regard for the victims suffering, humiliation, and personal integrity. It would cheapen their horrible experience, and expose them to an incre

37、ased danger of recurrence. When we lower the penalty for murder, it signals a lessened regard for the value of the victims life. Some critics of capital punishment, such as columnist Jimmy Breslin, have suggested that a life sentence is actually a harsher penalty for murder than death. This is sophi

38、stic nonsense. A few killers may decide not to appeal a death sentence, but the overwhelming majority make every effort to stay alive. It is by exacting the highest penalty for the taking of human life that we affirm the highest value of human life.原因4、死刑貶低人的生命價值。相反，可以很容易地證明，死刑提高了人的生命價值。如果強奸罪的刑罰降低，那

39、顯然標志著對受害者痛苦、屈辱和個人誠信方面的關(guān)注降低。這些受害者的痛苦經(jīng)歷就會失去價值，她們就會再次處于受到傷害的危險中。當我們降低謀殺罪的刑罰，這就標志著對受害者生命夾著的關(guān)注降低。一些死刑的批評家，如專欄作家吉米.布雷斯林，認為判處殺人犯終身監(jiān)禁其實是一種比死亡更嚴厲的刑罰。這是詭辯的無稽之談。一些殺人犯可能不會提出死刑上訴，但絕大多數(shù)人會盡一切努力維持生命。我們正是使用剝奪人生命的最高刑罰，來肯定人類生命的最高價值。 5. The death penalty is applied in a discriminatory manner. This factor no longer seem

40、s to be problem it once was. The appeals process for a condemned prisoner is lengthy and painstaking. Every effort is made to see that the verdict and sentence were fairly arrived at. However, assertions of discrimination are not an argument for ending the death penalty but for extending it. It is n

41、ot justice to exclude everyone from the penalty of the law if a few are found to be so favored. Justice requires that the law be applied equally to all.原因5、死刑是一種歧視方式。這一因素似乎不再和曾經(jīng)一樣是個問題了。一個死囚的上訴過程是漫長而艱苦的，盡一切努力確定作出的判決和刑罰公正地相符。然而，歧視的斷言不是結(jié)束死刑的理由，而是延長死刑的理由。如果發(fā)現(xiàn)一些人受此優(yōu)待而使每個人都免除法律懲罰是不公正的。正義要求法律平等地適用于所有人。 6.

42、Thou Shlat Not Kill. Opponents of the death penalty frequently cite the sixth of the Ten Commandments in an attempt to prove that capital punishment is divinely proscribed. In the original Hebrew, however, the Sixth Commandment reads “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder,” and the Toral specifies capital pu

43、nishment for a variety of offenses. The biblical viewpoint has been upheld by philosopher throughout history. The greatest thinkers of the nineteenth centuryKant, Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Montesquieu, and Millagreed that natural law properly authorizes the sovereign to take life in order to vindicat

44、e justice. Only Jeremy Bentham was ambivalent. Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin endorsed it. Abraham Lincoln authorized executions for deserters in wartime. Alexsis de Tocqueville, who expressed profound respect for American institutions, believed that the death penalty was indispensable to the s

45、upport of social order. The United States Constitution, widely admired as one of the seminal achievements in the history of humanity, condemns cruel and inhumane punishment, but does not condemn capital punishment.原因6、你不可殺人。死刑的反對者經(jīng)常引用十誡中的第六條，試圖證明死刑是神禁止的。然而，在希伯來原文中，第六誡是“不可殺人”，Toral 為列舉了各種罪行的死刑。歷史上，哲學

46、家一直堅持圣經(jīng)的觀點。十九世紀最偉大的思想家，如康德、洛克、霍布斯、盧梭、孟德斯鳩和穆勒，認為自然法恰當?shù)厥谟枇私y(tǒng)治者剝奪生命的權(quán)力以便維護公正。只有Jeremy Bentham是矛盾的。華盛頓、杰斐遜、富蘭克林贊同這一點。亞伯拉罕林肯批準處決戰(zhàn)時的逃兵。Alexsis de Tocqueville表達了對美國體制的深深敬意，認為死刑是維持社會秩序必不可少的。廣泛被譽為人類歷史上開創(chuàng)性成就之一的美國憲法，譴責殘忍和不人道的懲罰，但不譴責死刑。 7. The death penalty is state-sanctioned murder. This is the defense with wh

47、ich Messrs. Willie and Shaw hoped to soften the resolve of those who sentenced them to death. By saying in effect, “You are no better than I am,” the murderer seeks to bring his accusers down to his own level. It is also a popular argument among opponents of capital punishment, but a transparently f

48、alse one. Simply put, the state has rights that the private individual does not. In a democracy, those rights are given to the state by the electorate. The execution of a lawfully condemned killer is no more an act of murder than is legal imprisonment an act of kidnapping. If an individual forces a

49、neighbor to pay him money under threat of punishment, its called extortion. If the state does it, its called taxation. Rights and responsibilities surrendered by the individual are what give the state its power to govern. This contract is the foundation of civilization itself.原因7、死刑是國家批準的謀殺。這是威利先生和肖

50、先生希望用于軟化判處他們死刑的人的決心的辯護。實際上是說“你不比我更好，”兇手的目的是使他的控訴人降到與自己相同的地位。這也是死刑反對者中流行的說法，但顯然是一個錯誤的說法。簡單地說，國家擁有個人無法擁有的權(quán)利。在一個民主國家，選民賦予國家這些權(quán)利。正如合法監(jiān)禁不是綁架一樣，依法處決殺人犯也不是謀殺行為。如果一個人在懲罰的威脅下強迫向鄰居要錢時，就是所謂的敲詐勒索。如果國家這樣做了，就是所謂的稅收。個人所賦予的權(quán)利和責任就是其賦予國家的統(tǒng)治權(quán)。這個契約是文明本身的基礎。 wants his or her rights, and will defend them jealously. Not everyone, however, wants responsibilities, especially the painful responsibilities t