CNN News:美最高法院裁定支持同性婚姻 讲究平等

I'm Anderson Cooper.

我是安德森·库珀。

Welcome to the podcast.

欢迎收看播客节目。

The Supreme Court makes history on same-sex marriage.

最高法院对于同性婚姻做出了历史的改革。

Let's get started.

让我们马上开始今天的节目。

We begin, though, tonight with the Supreme Court's two historic decisions on same-sex marriage.

我们今晚从最高法院对于同性婚姻的两个历史性决定开始。

One striking down a key provision of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act.

一是推翻了联邦婚姻保护法案的一项关键条款。

The other effectively allowing same-sex marriage in the state of California.

二是切实有效地允许在加利福尼亚的同性婚姻。

Here is how it looked and sounded outside the high court moments after the ruling came down.

下面是判决下来后最高法院外面人声鼎沸欢庆的情况。

Jubilation there and among equality supporters across the country as words spread of the two decisions.

随着广播播出这两项裁定，整个国家的平等支持者们欢呼声不绝于耳。

In one, the court by a 5-4 majority striking down DOMA, which among other things barred federal recognition of same-sex marriage.

在其中，最高法院以5：4的票数认定《保护婚姻法案》(DOMA)违宪，在这项法案中禁止联邦政府承认的同性婚姻。

Writing for the majority as he did 10 years ago in "Lawrence v. Texas,"

就像他在10年前为大多数人写下的“劳伦斯诉德克萨斯州案”，

Justice Anthony Kennedy declared DOMA in violation of the Fifth Amendment's EqualProtection clause.

大法官安东尼·肯尼迪宣布DOMA违反第5修正案的平等保护条款。

In so many words, he also called it an act of cruelty.

在他的许多话语中，他也将其称为残酷的法案。

Quote, "The federal statute is invalid for no," excuse me.

这里引用他的原话:“联邦法令对于任何无效,”对不起。

“Is invalid for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and injure those whom the state by its marriage laws sought to protect in personhood and dignity."

“对于以不合法的目的逾越目的和效果来贬低及伤害那些州寻求人格和尊严保护婚姻法律的人们无效。”

The four most conservative justices dissented including Chief Justice John Roberts on grounds that DOMA, which passed bipartisan support, should not be second guessed by the court.

包括首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨在内的4位最为保守的法官们反对，他们一致认为DOMA的通过得到了两党支持,不应由法院在之后评定。

Chief Justice Roberts went the other way on California's Proposition 8 marriage ban,

首席大法官罗伯茨从加州8号提案婚姻禁令的另一方面展开,

a 5-4 majority kicking it back to the state, effectively paving the way for same-sex marriages there to resume.

但最终5：4的票数结果将其驳回,有效地为同性婚姻的恢复铺平了道路。

It's a thumbnail sketch of how the justices weighed the case.

这是一次法官们权衡案例的简单概况。

At the end of the day, though, for people on both sides of the issue,

在这一天结束的时候,尽管仍然有这一问题持有异议的人们,

this is not just a constitutional question or a legislative matter.

但这不仅是一个宪法问题或者立法问题。

It is very personal.

它是非常私人的。

For Edie Windsor who brought the DOMA case after facing what she called unequal treatment because her late spouse was a woman,

对于牵涉DOMA案在内的伊迪·温莎而言，因为自己的已故配偶是一位女性而面对她所说的不平等的待遇后，

this was bittersweet vindication.

她表示这是苦乐参半的辩护。

I cried. I cried. OK. Really, obviously, but yes, the immediate reaction was thus tears.

我哭了。我哭了。好的。真的,很明显,但是太好了,我的第一反应就是痛哭流涕。

The same could be said for so many others including two of our guests tonight,

包括今晚我们的两位客人在内及很多人可能会说和她一样的话语,

blogger Andrew Sullivan and Evan Wolfson, both of whom have fought for marriage equality for years and millions more,

博主安德鲁·苏利文和伊万·沃尔夫森两人已争取婚姻平等多年,而数百万人,

some married, some waiting to get married, and some for whom marriage is not yet an option.

有些已经结婚,有些则还在等待,而有些人的婚姻还是未知数。

On the other side, there are millions of other Americans whom,

另一方面,还有数以百万计的其他美国人,

for whom marriage who believe is one man and one woman and see today's ruling as a betrayalof their beliefs in the Constitution.

他们相信婚姻就是男人和女人的事情,并且认为今天的裁决背叛自己在宪法中所信仰的。

This is far from over.

这还远未结束。

In fact, the time is not on the side of those who want to redefine marriage.

事实上,时间没有站在那些想重新定义婚姻的人一边。

If it were, I don't think they would have gone to the court trying to impose same-sex marriage on the entire nation.

如果是这样的话,我不认为他们会去法院试图强加给整个国家同性婚姻。