Bổn văn tác giả hệ anh quốc 《 kim dung thời báo 》 chuyên lan tác gia la bá đặc · xá thụy ân tư lợi ( Robert Shrimsley ).
Trắc thí trung khả năng ngộ đáo đích từ hối hòa tri thức:
pesky['peskɪ] adj. Ma phiền đích, não nhân đích
wedlock['wedlɒk] n. Dĩ hôn trạng thái; hôn nhân
polygamy[pə'lɪgəmɪ] n. Nhất phu đa thê chế
no less a person than thân phân bất đê vu
specious['spiːʃəs] adj. Tự thị nhi phi đích
vociferous[və(ʊ)'sɪf(ə)rəs] adj. Khiếu hảm đích, sảo nháo đích
The Catholic Church is ruining my marriage (684 words)
My marriage is under threat; its very existence is being undermined. I know this because the Catholic Church says so. I’m not Catholic myself, you understand, but if there’s one thing those priests know about, it’s marriage. Similar warnings are coming from other faith-leaders and the rightwing commentators.
And it’s all because of those pesky gays.
It turns out that the very foundations of our union will be irrevocably eroded if gays are allowed to marry. No less an authority than Rick Santorum, currently running second for the Republican presidential nomination, says redefining wedlock to include gays could “cheapen marriage… make it something less valuable, special”. Scotland’s leading Catholic bishop appears to argue that if gay marriage is legalised, the clamour will start for polygamy to be similarly blessed. But it’s not just marriage at stake. The Pope says that allowing gays to call themselves married is one of a number of threats to “the future of humanity itself”. Yikes.
Marriage, according to our religious leaders is less a robust, timeless institution than a precious, delicate thing – a dandelion in the wind, easily blown away by others you’ve never met enjoying the same benefits. It’s like being a member of an elite club and then finding out that Katie Price has joined. You wonder if you still belong.
I understand where they are coming from. I recently bought an espresso machine to which I was hugely attached until I noticed Whittard was selling the same model to gays. Suddenly my macchiato seemed cheapened; and questioned my commitment to the morning shot. Now the Illy languishes untouched and I have begun dallying with an old jar of Maxwell House I was once close to. We’d fallen out of touch after I’d committed to proper coffee but recently reconnected via Facebook. So I’m wise to the dangers of gay marriage. We all saw what happened when homosexuality was legalised. Crime rates soared, obviously because people felt their previous law-abiding status had been devalued by the decision to stop treating gays as criminals.
My wife and I are resigned to our fate if the government presses ahead with reform and have already begun discussing custody arrangements. It’s a pity; because we’ve been happy together. But it’s clear that at the first glimpse of Boy George at the altar I’ll abandon my family and move out to small flat above a Pizza Hut. Across the nation, young couples will cancel their engagements, put off by the weddings of other adults who love each other and increased competition for wedding venues from gays and polygamists.
When otherwise intelligent people rely on such specious arguments, you have to wonder whether it isn’t because they daren’t say what they truly believe – that gays are lesser human beings who should be denied the same rights as others. It would be wrong to tar everyone in this way, but it is striking how many of the most vociferous objections come from those with a less-than-stellar record on gay rights.
Where opponents of gay marriage have a point is in noting that there seem to be few benefits not already secured by civil partnerships. But like any excluded minority, it is natural for gays to rail against exclusion. It is hard to believe that all those Jews who used to campaign against their exclusion from elite golf clubs actually wanted to join them. I don’t think there’s ever been a great Jewish golfer and it’s a long walk to the club house if you get hungry. But when someone takes the trouble to bar you, well, a chap can take that kind of thing personally.
One of the most striking (and heartwarming) social developments of the past decade is just how quickly civil partnerships have become entirely unremarkable. It is hard to believe the same would not be true of gay marriage. But maybe this easy acceptance is what is really driving the increasingly apocalyptic warnings. Perhaps, what worries opponents is not that marriage and society will be disastrously undermined by this reform, but that they won’t.
Thỉnh căn cư nhĩ sở độc đáo đích văn chương nội dung, hoàn thành dĩ hạ tự trắc đề mục:
1.According to the first paragraph(without regarding to the whole passage), how would the author react to the words of a Catholic priest?
A. He will accept all the words.
B. He will accept none of the words.
C. He will accept all the words except those concerning marriage.
D. He will accept none of the words except those concerning marriage.
Đáp án (1)
2. "When otherwise intelligent people rely on such specious arguments,..."
What do "such specious arguments" stand for?
A. The arguements made by religious leaders like the Scotland’s leading Catholic bishop.
B. The arguements made by politicans like Rick Santorum.
C. The arguements made by the author himself in the two paragraphs above.
D. All of the above
Đáp án (2)
3.According to the passage, which of following groups of people will most probably oppose gays marriage?
A. Gays
B. Those who support polygamy
C. Those who regard gays as lesser human beings
D. Those Jews who used to campaign against their exclusion from elite golf clubs
Đáp án (3)
4.How does the author organize this passage?
A. The author presents the arguements made by the opponents of gays marriage at first and then refutes them by pointing out their foundamental reason for opposing gays marriage.
B. The author presents a debate on gays marriage by showing the thesis made by each side.
C. The author presents arguements made by religious leaders and politicians on opposing gays marriage at first and support these arguements with his own thesis.
D. The author presents his idea on gays marriage at first and then supports his idea with several thesis.
Đáp án (4)
* * *
(1) đáp án: D.He will accept none of the words except those concerning marriage.
Giải thích: Căn cư "but if there’s one thing those priests know about, it’s marriage." D chính xác.
(2) đáp án: D. All of the above.
Giải thích: Vô
(3) đáp án: C.Those who regard gays as lesser human beings
Giải thích: Căn cư đảo sổ đệ tam đoạn, tác giả nhận vi nhân môn chi sở dĩ phản đối đồng tính luyến hôn nhân, tòng căn bổn thượng giảng, thị nhân vi tha môn nhận vi đồng tính luyến giả bổn thân thị đê nhân nhất đẳng đích nhân. Nhân thử tuyển C.
(4) đáp án: A.The author presents the arguements made by the opponents of gays marriage at first and then refutes them by pointing out their foundamental reason for opposing gays marriage.
Giải thích: Xuất đề giả nhận vi, tác giả thủ tiên dụng đại lượng đích thiên phúc trần thuật liễu các chủng phản đối đồng tính luyến hôn nhân đích quan điểm, nhượng nhân giác đắc tác giả tự kỷ dã thị kỳ trung nhất viên. Tác giả nhĩ hậu thoại phong nhất chuyển, thuyết na ta nhân chi sở dĩ phản đối đồng tính luyến hôn nhân, thị nhân vi tha môn nhận vi đồng tính luyến giả bổn thân thị đê nhân nhất đẳng đích nhân. Chí vu tác giả tự kỷ đối đồng tính luyến hôn nhân đích khán pháp, xuất đề giả nhận vi văn trung tịnh vị minh kỳ.
