第一篇：美国20世纪100个经典英文演讲MP3
RankSpeakerTitle/TextAudio1Martin Luther King, Jr.“I Have A Dream”mp3 Stream2
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Inaugural Address
mp3 Stream3Franklin Delano Roosevelt
First Inaugural Address
mp3 Stream4Franklin Delano Roosevelt
pearl Harbor Address to the Nation
mp3 Stream5Barbara Charline Jordan
1976 DNC Keynote Address
mp3 Stream
6Richard Milhous Nixon“Checkers”
mp3 Stream7Malcolm X“The Ballot or the Bullet”
mp3.1 mp3.2
8Ronald Wilson ReaganShuttle ''Challenger'' Disaster Address
mp3 Stream9John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Houston Ministerial Association Speech
mp3 Stream10Lyndon Baines Johnson“We Shall Overcome”
mp3 Stream11Mario Mathew Cuomo1984 DNC Keynote Address
mp3 Stream12Jesse Louis Jackson1984 DNC Address
mp3.1 mp3.2 mp3.3
13Barbara Charline Jordan
Statement on the Articles of Impeachment
mp3 Stream14(General)Douglas MacArthur
Farewell Address to Congress
mp3 Stream15Martin Luther King, Jr.“I've Been to the Mountaintop”
mp3 Stream16Theodore Roosevelt
“The Man with the Muck-rake”
17Robert Francis Kennedy
Remarks on the Assassination of MLKing
mp3 Stream18Dwight David EisenhowerFarewell Address
mp3 Stream19Woodrow Thomas Wilson
War Message
20(General)Douglas MacArthur
“Duty, Honor, Country”
mp3 Stream21Richard Milhous Nixon
“The Great Silent Majority”
mp3 Stream22John Fitzgerald Kennedy
“Ich bin ein Berliner”
mp3 Stream23Clarence Seward Darrow
“Mercy for Leopold and Loeb”
24Russell H.Conwell
“Acres of Diamonds”
mp3 Stream25Ronald Wilson Reagan
“A Time for Choosing”
mp3 Streamw26Huey pierce Long“Every Man a King”
27Anna Howard Shaw“The Fundamental principle of a Republic”28Franklin Delano Roosevelt
“The Arsenal of Democracy”
mp3 Stream29Ronald Wilson Reagan
“The Evil Empire”
mp3 Stream30Ronald Wilson Reagan
First Inaugural Address
mp3 Stream31Franklin Delano Roosevelt
First Fireside Chat
mp3 Stream32Harry S.Truman“The Truman Doctrine”
mp3 Stream33William Cuthbert FaulknerNobel prize Acceptance Speech
mp3 Stream34Eugene Victor Debs
1918 Statement to the Court
35Hillary Rodham Clinton
“Women's Rights are Human Rights”
36Dwight David Eisenhower
“Atoms for peace”
mp3 Stream37John Fitzgerald Kennedy
American University Commencement Address
mp3
38Dorothy Ann Willis Richards
1988 DNC Keynote Address
mp3
39Richard Milhous Nixon
Resignation Speech
mp3
40Woodrow Thomas Wilson
“The Fourteen points”
41Margaret Chase Smith
“Declaration of Conscience”
42Franklin Delano Roosevelt
“The Four Freedoms”
mp343Martin Luther King, Jr.“A Time to Break Silence”
mp344Mary Church Terrell
“What it Means to be Colored in the...U.S.”
45William Jennings Bryan
“Against Imperialism”
Real Audio Stream
46Margaret Higgins Sanger
“The Morality of Birth Control”
47Barbara pierce Bush
1990 Wellesley College Commencement Address
mp3
48John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Civil Rights Address
mp3
49John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Cuban Missile Crisis Address
mp3
50Spiro Theodore Agnew
“Television News Coverage”
mp3
w51Jesse Louis Jackson
1988 DNC Address
mp3.1 mp3.252Mary Fisher
“A Whisper of AIDS”
mp353Lyndon Baines Johnson“The Great Society”mp3 Stream54George Catlett Marshall
“The Marshall plan”
mp3
55Edward Moore Kennedy
“Truth and Tolerance in America”
mp356Adlai Ewing Stevenson
presidential Nomination Acceptance Address
57Anna Eleanor Roosevelt
“The Struggle for Human Rights”
58Geraldine Anne Ferraro
Vice-presidential Nomination Acceptance Speech
mp359Robert Marion La Follette
“Free Speech in Wartime”
60Ronald Wilson Reagan
40th Anniversary of D-Day Address
mp3
61Mario Mathew Cuomo
“Religious Belief and public Morality”62Edward Moore Kennedy
“Chappaquiddick”
mp3
63John Llewellyn Lewis
“The Rights of Labor”
64Barry Morris Goldwater
presidential Nomination Acceptance Address
mp365Stokely Carmichael
“Black power”
66Hubert Horatio Humphrey
1948 DNC Address
67Emma Goldman
Address to the Jury
68Carrie Chapman Catt
“The Crisis”
69Newton Norman Minow
“Television and the public Interest”
Real Audio Stream70Edward Moore Kennedy
Eulogy for Robert Francis Kennedy
mp3 Stream71Anita Faye HillStatement to the Senate Judiciary Committee
mp372Woodrow Thomas WilsonLeague of Nations Final Address
73Henry Louis(“Lou”)Gehrig
Farewell to Baseball Address
mp3
74Richard Milhous Nixon
Cambodian Incursion Address
mp375CarrieChapman Catt
Address to the U.S.Congress
sw76Edward Moore Kennedy
1980 DNC Address
mp377Lyndon Baines Johnson
On Vietnam and Not Seeking Re-Election
mp378Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Commonwealth Club Address
79Woodrow Thomas Wilson
First Inaugural Address
80Mario Savio
“An End to History”
81Elizabeth Glaser
1992 DNC Address
mp382Eugene Victor Debs
“The Issue”
83Margaret Higgins Sanger“The Children's Era”84Ursula Le Guin“A Left-Handed Commencement Address”85Crystal Eastman
“Now We Can Begin”
86Huey pierce Long
“Share Our Wealth”87Gerald Rudolph Ford
Address on Taking the Oath of Office
mp3
88Cesar Estrada Chavez
Speech on Ending His 25 Day Fast
89Elizabeth Gurley Flynn
Statement at the Smith Act Trial
90Jimmy Earl Carter
“A Crisis of Confidence”
mp391Malcolm X
“Message to the Grassroots”
mp392William Jefferson Clinton
Oklahoma Bombing Memorial Address
mp393Shirley Anita St.Hill Chisholm“For the Equal Rights Amendment”94Ronald Wilson ReaganBrandenburg Gate Addressmp395Eliezer(“Elie”)Wiesel“The perils of Indifference”mp3
96Gerald Rudolph Ford
National Address pardoning Richard M.Nixon
mp3
97Woodrow Thomas Wilson
“For the League of Nations”
98Lyndon Baines Johnson
“Let Us Continue”
mp399Joseph N.Welch
“Have You No Sense of Decency”
mp3100Anna Eleanor Roosevelt
Adopting the Declaration of Human Rights
mp3第二篇：美国经典英文演讲100篇
美国经典英文演讲100篇:Brandenburg Gate Address
时间:2008-6-12 10:19:20 来源:本站原创
作者:echo
(女宇航员选拔标准 | 招聘英语编辑)
进入MP3下载页面
下载到我的手机(下载播放软件 | 如不能播放请点击此处)
Ronald Reagan
Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate
delivered 12 June 1987, West Berlin
[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio.(2)]
Thank you.Thank you, very much.Chancellor Kohl, Governing Mayor Diepgen, ladies and gentlemen: Twenty four years ago, President John F.Kennedy visited Berlin, and speaking to the people of this city and the world at the city hall.Well since then two other presidents have come, each in his turn to Berlin.And today, I, myself, make my second visit to your city.We come to Berlin, we American Presidents, because it's our duty to speak in this place of freedom.But I must confess, we’re drawn here by other things as well;by the feeling of history in this city--more than 500 years older than our own nation;by the beauty of the Grunewald and the Tiergarten;most of all, by your courage and determination.Perhaps the composer, Paul Linke, understood something about American Presidents.You see, like so many Presidents before me, I come here today because wherever I go, whatever I do: “Ich hab noch einen Koffer in Berlin” [I still have a suitcase in Berlin.]
Our gathering today is being broadcast throughout Western Europe and North America.I understand that it is being seen and heard as well in the East.To those listening throughout Eastern Europe, I extend my warmest greetings and the good will of the American people.To those listening in East Berlin, a special word: Although I cannot be with you, I address my remarks to you just as surely as to those standing here before me.For I join you, as I join your fellow countrymen in the West, in this firm, this unalterable belief: Es gibt nur ein Berlin.[There is only one Berlin.]
Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe.From the Baltic South, those barriers cut across Germany in a gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers.Farther south, there may be no visible, no obvious wall.But there remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same--still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state.Yet, it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly;here, cutting across your city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world.Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German separated from his fellow men.Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar.President Von Weizsäcker has said, “The German question is open as long as the Brandenburg Gate is closed.” Well today--today I say: As long as this gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind.Yet, I do not come here to lament.For I find in Berlin a message of hope, even in the shadow of this wall, a message of triumph.In this season of spring in 1945, the people of Berlin emerged from their air-raid shelters to find devastation.Thousands of miles away, the people of the United States reached out to help.And in 1947 Secretary of State--as you've been told--George Marshall announced the creation of what would become known as the Marshall Plan.Speaking precisely 40 years ago this month, he said: “Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos.”
In the Reichstag a few moments ago, I saw a display commemorating this 40th anniversary of the Marshall Plan.I was struck by a sign--the sign on a burnt-out, gutted structure that was being rebuilt.I understand that Berliners of my own generation can remember seeing signs like it dotted throughout the western sectors of the city.The sign read simply: “The Marshall Plan is helping here to strengthen the free world.” A strong, free world in the West--that dream became real.Japan rose from ruin to become an economic giant.Italy, France, Belgium--virtually every nation in Western Europe saw political and economic rebirth;the European Community was founded.In West Germany and here in Berlin, there took place an economic miracle, the Wirtschaftswunder.Adenauer, Erhard, Reuter, and other leaders understood the practical importance of liberty--that just as truth can flourish only when the journalist is given freedom of speech, so prosperity can come about only when the farmer and businessman enjoy economic freedom.The German leaders--the German leaders reduced tariffs, expanded free trade, lowered taxes.From 1950 to 1960 alone, the standard of living in West Germany and Berlin doubled.Where four decades ago there was rubble, today in West Berlin there is the greatest industrial output of any city in Germany: busy office blocks, fine homes and apartments, proud avenues, and the spreading lawns of parkland.Where a city's culture seemed to have been destroyed, today there are two great universities, orchestras and an opera, countless theaters, and museums.Where there was want, today there's abundance--food, clothing, automobiles--the wonderful goods of the Kudamm.¹ From devastation, from utter ruin, you Berliners have, in freedom, rebuilt a city that once again ranks as one of the greatest on earth.Now the Soviets may have had other plans.But my friends, there were a few things the Soviets didn't count on: Berliner Herz, Berliner Humor, ja, und Berliner Schnauze.[Berliner heart, Berliner humor, yes, and a Berliner Schnauze.²]
In the 1950s--In the 1950s Khrushchev predicted: “We will bury you.”
But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history.In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food.Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself.After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity.Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace.Freedom is the victor.And now--now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom.We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness.Some political prisoners have been released.Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed.Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness;for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty--the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace.There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate.Mr.Gorbachev, open this gate.Mr.Gorbachev--Mr.Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
I understand the fear of war and the pain of division that afflict this continent, and I pledge to you my country's efforts to help overcome these burdens.To be sure, we in the West must resist Soviet expansion.So, we must maintain defenses of unassailable strength.Yet we seek peace;so we must strive to reduce arms on both sides.Beginning 10 years ago, the Soviets challenged the Western alliance with a grave new threat, hundreds of new and more deadly SS-20 nuclear missiles capable of striking every capital in Europe.The Western alliance responded by committing itself to a counter-deployment(unless the Soviets agreed to negotiate a better solution)--namely, the elimination of such weapons on both sides.For many months, the Soviets refused to bargain in earnestness.As the alliance, in turn, prepared to go forward with its counter-deployment, there were difficult days, days of protests like those during my 1982 visit to this city;and the Soviets later walked away from the table.But through it all, the alliance held firm.And I invite those who protested then--I invite those who protest today--to mark this fact: Because we remained strong, the Soviets came back to the table.Because we remained strong, today we have within reach the possibility, not merely of limiting the growth of arms, but of eliminating, for the first time, an entire class of nuclear weapons from the face of the earth.As I speak, NATO ministers are meeting in Iceland to review the progress of our proposals for eliminating these weapons.At the talks in Geneva, we have also proposed deep cuts in strategic offensive weapons.And the Western allies have likewise made far-reaching proposals to reduce the danger of conventional war and to place a total ban on chemical weapons.While we pursue these arms reductions, I pledge to you that we will maintain the capacity to deter Soviet aggression at any level at which it might occur.And in cooperation with many of our allies, the United States is pursuing the Strategic Defense Initiative--research to base deterrence not on the threat of offensive retaliation, but on defenses that truly defend;on systems, in short, that will not target populations, but shield them.By these means we seek to increase the safety of Europe and all the world.But we must remember a crucial fact: East and West do not mistrust each other because we are armed;we are armed because we mistrust each other.And our differences are not about weapons but about liberty.When President Kennedy spoke at the City Hall those 24 years ago, freedom was encircled;Berlin was under siege.And today, despite all the pressures upon this city, Berlin stands secure in its liberty.And freedom itself is transforming the globe.In the Philippines, in South and Central America, democracy has been given a rebirth.Throughout the Pacific, free markets are working miracle after miracle of economic growth.In the industrialized nations, a technological revolution is taking place, a revolution marked by rapid, dramatic advances in computers and telecommunications.In Europe, only one nation and those it controls refuse to join the community of freedom.Yet in this age of redoubled economic growth, of information and innovation, the Soviet Union faces a choice: It must make fundamental changes, or it will become obsolete.Today, thus, represents a moment of hope.We in the West stand ready to cooperate with the East to promote true openness, to break down barriers that separate people, to create a safer, freer world.And surely there is no better place than Berlin, the meeting place of East and West, to make a start.Free people of Berlin: Today, as in the past, the United States stands for the strict observance and full implementation of all parts of the Four Power Agreement of 1971.Let us use this occasion, the 750th anniversary of this city, to usher in a new era, to seek a still fuller, richer life for the Berlin of the future.Together, let us maintain and develop the ties between the Federal Republic and the Western sectors of Berlin, which is permitted by the 1971 agreement.And I invite Mr.Gorbachev: Let us work to bring the Eastern and Western parts of the city closer together, so that all the inhabitants of all Berlin can enjoy the benefits that come with life in one of the great cities of the world.To open Berlin still further to all Europe, East and West, let us expand the vital air access to this city, finding ways of making commercial air service to Berlin more convenient, more comfortable, and more economical.We look to the day when West Berlin can become one of the chief aviation hubs in all central Europe.With--With our French--With our French and British partners, the United States is prepared to help bring international meetings to Berlin.It would be only fitting for Berlin to serve as the site of United Nations meetings, or world conferences on human rights and arms control, or other issues that call for international cooperation.There is no better way to establish hope for the future than to enlighten young minds, and we would be honored to sponsor summer youth exchanges, cultural events, and other programs for young Berliners from the East.Our French and British friends, I'm certain, will do the same.And it's my hope that an authority can be found in East Berlin to sponsor visits from young people of the Western sectors.One final proposal, one close to my heart: Sport represents a source of enjoyment and ennoblement, and you may have noted that the Republic of Korea--South Korea--has offered to permit certain events of the 1988 Olympics to take place in the North.International sports competitions of all kinds could take place in both parts of this city.And what better way to demonstrate to the world the openness of this city than to offer in some future year to hold the Olympic games here in Berlin, East and West.In these four decades, as I have said, you Berliners have built a great city.You've done so in spite of threats--the Soviet attempts to impose the East-mark, the blockade.Today the city thrives in spite of the challenges implicit in the very presence of this wall.What keeps you here? Certainly there's a great deal to be said for your fortitude, for your defiant courage.But I believe there's something deeper, something that involves Berlin's whole look and feel and way of life--not mere sentiment.No one could live long in Berlin without being completely disabused of illusions.Something, instead, that has seen the difficulties of life in Berlin but chose to accept them, that continues to build this good and proud city in contrast to a surrounding totalitarian presence, that refuses to release human energies or aspirations, something that speaks with a powerful voice of affirmation, that says “yes” to this city, yes to the future, yes to freedom.In a word, I would submit that what keeps you in Berlin--is “love.”
Love both profound and abiding.Perhaps this gets to the root of the matter, to the most fundamental distinction of all between East and West.The totalitarian world produces backwardness because it does such violence to the spirit, thwarting the human impulse to create, to enjoy, to worship.The totalitarian world finds even symbols of love and of worship an affront.Years ago, before the East Germans began rebuilding their churches, they erected a secular structure: the television tower at Alexander Platz.Virtually ever since, the authorities have been working to correct what they view as the tower's one major flaw: treating the glass sphere at the top with paints and chemicals of every kind.Yet even today when the sun strikes that sphere, that sphere that towers over all Berlin, the light makes the sign of the cross.There in Berlin, like the city itself, symbols of love, symbols of worship, cannot be suppressed.As I looked out a moment ago from the Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner(quote):
“This wall will fall.Beliefs become reality.”
Yes, across Europe, this wall will fall, for it cannot withstand faith;it cannot withstand truth.The wall cannot withstand freedom.And I would like, before I close, to say one word.I have read, and I have been questioned since I've been here about certain demonstrations against my coming.And I would like to say just one thing, and to those who demonstrate so.I wonder if they have ever asked themselves that if they should have the kind of government they apparently seek, no one would ever be able to do what they're doing again.Thank you and God bless you all.Thank you.美国经典英文演讲100篇:Oklahoma Bombing Memorial Address
时间:2008-6-12 10:19:08 来源:本站原创
作者:echo
(女宇航员选拔标准 | 招聘英语编辑)
进入MP3下载页面
下载到我的手机(下载播放软件 | 如不能播放请点击此处)
William Jefferson Clinton
Oklahoma Bombing Memorial Prayer Service Address
delivered 23 April 1995 in Oklahoma City, OK
[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio.(2)]
Thank you very much, Governor Keating and Mrs.Keating, Reverend Graham, to the families of those who have been lost and wounded, to the people of Oklahoma City, who have endured so much, and the people of this wonderful state, to all of you who are here as our fellow Americans.I am honored to be here today to represent the American people.But I have to tell you that Hillary and I also come as parents, as husband and wife, as people who were your neighbors for some of the best years of our lives.Today our nation joins with you in grief.We mourn with you.We share your hope against hope that some may still survive.We thank all those who have worked so heroically to save lives and to solve this crime--those here in Oklahoma and those who are all across this great land, and many who left their own lives to come here to work hand in hand with you.We pledge to do all we can to help you heal the injured, to rebuild this city, and to bring to justice those who did this evil.This terrible sin took the lives of our American family, innocent children in that building, only because their parents were trying to be good parents as well as good workers;citizens in the building going about their daily business;and many there who served the rest of us--who worked to help the elderly and the disabled, who worked to support our farmers and our veterans, who worked to enforce our laws and to protect us.Let us say clearly, they served us well, and we are grateful.But for so many of you they were also neighbors and friends.You saw them at church or the PTA meetings, at the civic clubs, at the ball park.You know them in ways that all the rest of America could not.And to all the members of the families here present who have suffered loss, though we share your grief, your pain is unimaginable, and we know that.We cannot undo it.That is God's work.Our words seem small beside the loss you have endured.But I found a few I wanted to share today.I've received a lot of letters in these last terrible days.One stood out because it came from a young widow and a mother of three whose own husband was murdered with over 200 other Americans when Pan Am 103 was shot down.Here is what that woman said I should say to you today:
The anger you feel is valid, but you must not allow yourselves to be consumed by it.The hurt you feel must not be allowed to turn into hate, but instead into the search for justice.The loss you feel must not paralyze your own lives.Instead, you must try to pay tribute to your loved ones by continuing to do all the things they left undone, thus ensuring they did not die in vain.Wise words from one who also knows.You have lost too much, but you have not lost everything.And you have certainly not lost America, for we will stand with you for as many tomorrows as it takes.If ever we needed evidence of that, I could only recall the words of Governor and Mrs.Keating: “If anybody thinks that Americans are mostly mean and selfish, they ought to come to Oklahoma.If anybody thinks Americans have lost the capacity for love and caring and courage, they ought to come to Oklahoma.”
To all my fellow Americans beyond this hall, I say, one thing we owe those who have sacrificed is the duty to purge ourselves of the dark forces which gave rise to this evil.They are forces that threaten our common peace, our freedom, our way of life.Let us teach our children that the God of comfort is also the God of righteousness: Those who trouble their own house will inherit the wind.¹ Justice will prevail.Let us let our own children know that we will stand against the forces of fear.When there is talk of hatred, let us stand up and talk against it.When there is talk of violence, let us stand up and talk against it.In the face of death, let us honor life.As St.Paul admonished us, Let us “not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”²
Yesterday, Hillary and I had the privilege of speaking with some children of other federal employees--children like those who were lost here.And one little girl said something we will never forget.She said, “We should all plant a tree in memory of the children.” So this morning before we got on the plane to come here, at the White House, we planted that tree in honor of the children of Oklahoma.It was a dogwood with its wonderful spring flower and its deep, enduring roots.It embodies the lesson of the Psalms--that the life of a good person is like a tree whose leaf does not wither.³
My fellow Americans, a tree takes a long time to grow, and wounds take a long time to heal.But we must begin.Those who are lost now belong to God.Some day we will be with them.But until that happens, their legacy must be our lives.Thank you all, and God bless you.
第三篇：美国经典英文演讲一百篇
美国20世纪经典英语演讲100篇（MP3+文本）
· · · ·
· · · · ·
· · · · · · · · ·
· · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · · ·
· ·
· ·
· · · · ·
· · · · · · ·
· ·
· · ·
·
· · · · · · ·
第四篇：美国经典英文演讲100篇1992_DNC_Address
美国经典英文演讲100篇:1992 DNC Address
1992 Democratic National Convention Address
[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio.(2)]
I'm Elizabeth Glaser.Eleven years ago, while giving birth to my first child, I hemorrhaged and was transfused with seven pints of blood.Four years later, I found out that I had been infected with the AIDS virus and had unknowingly passed it to my daughter, Ariel, through my breast milk, and my son, Jake, in utero.Twenty years ago I wanted to be at the Democratic Convention because it was a way to participate in my country.Today, I am here because it's a matter of life and death.Exactly--Exactly four years ago my daughter died of AIDS.She did not survive the Reagan Administration.I am here because my son and I may not survive four more years of leaders who say they care, but do nothing.I--I am in a race with the clock.This is not about being a Republican or an Independent or a Democrat.It's about the future--for each and every one of us.I started out just a mom--fighting for the life of her child.But along the way I learned how unfair America can be today, not just for people who have HIV, but for many, many people--poor people, gay people, people of color, children.A strange spokesperson for such a group: a well-to-do white woman.But I have learned my lesson the hard way, and I know that America has lost her path and is at risk of losing her soul.America wake up: We are all in a struggle between life and death.I understand--I understand the sense of frustration and despair in our country, because I know firsthand about shouting for help and getting no answer.I went to Washington to tell Presidents Reagan and Bush that much, much more had to be done for AIDS research and care, and that children couldn't be forgotten.The first time, when nothing happened, I thought, “They just didn't hear me.” The second time, when nothing happened, I thought, “Maybe I didn't shout loud enough.” But now I realize they don't hear because they don't want to listen.When you cry for help and no one listens, you start to lose your hope.I began to lose faith in America.I felt my country was letting me down--and it was.This is not the America I was raised to be proud of.I was
raised to believe that other's problems were my problems as well.But when I tell most people about HIV, in hopes that they will help and care, I see the look in their eyes: “It's not my problem,” they're thinking.Well, it's everyone's problem and we need a leader who will tell us that.We need a visionary to guide us--to say it wasn't all right for Ryan White to be banned from school because he had AIDS, to say it wasn't alright for a man or a woman to be denied a job because they're infected with this virus.We need a leader who is truly committed to educating us.I believe in America, but not with a leadership of selfishness and greed--where the wealthy get health care and insurance and the poor don't.Do you know--Do you know how much my AIDS care costs? Over 40,000 dollars a year.Someone without insurance can't afford this.Even the drugs that I hope will keep me alive are out of reach for others.Is their life any less valuable? Of course not.This is not the America I was raised to be proud of--where rich people get care and drugs that poor people can't.We need health care for all.We need a leader who will say this and do something about it.I believe in America, but not a leadership that talks about problems but is incapable of solving them--two HIV commission reports with recommendations about what to do to solve this crisis sitting on shelves, gathering dust.We need a leader who will not only listen to these recommendations, but implement them.I believe in America, but not with a leadership that doesn't hold government accountable.I go to Washington to the National Institutes of Health and say, “Show me what you're doing on HIV.” They hate it when I come because I try to tell them how to do it better.But that's why I love being a taxpayer, because it's my money and they must feel accountable.I believe in an America where our leaders talk straight.When anyone tells President Bush that the battle against AIDS is seriously under-funded, he juggles the numbers to mislead the public into thinking we're spending twice as much as we really are.While they play games with numbers, people are dying.I believe in America, but an America where there is a light in every home.A thousand points of light just wasn't enough: My house has been dark for too long.Once every generation, history brings us to an important crossroads.Sometimes in life there is that moment when it's possible to make a change for the better.This is one of those moments.For me, this is not politics.This is a crisis of caring.In this hall is the future--women, men of all colors saying, “Take America back.” We are--We are just real people wanting a more hopeful life.But words and ideas are not enough.Good thoughts won't save my family.What's the point of caring if we don't do something about it? A President and a Congress that can work together so we can get out of this gridlock and move ahead, because I don't win my war if the President cares and the Congress, or if the Congress cares and the President doesn't support the ideas.The people in this hall this week, the Democratic Party, all of us can begin to deliver that partnership, and in November we can all bring it home.My daughter lived seven years, and in her last year, when she couldn't walk or talk, her wisdom shone through.She taught me to love, when all I wanted to do was hate.She taught me to help others, when all I wanted to do was help myself.She taught me to be brave, when all I felt was fear.My daughter and I loved each other with simplicity.America, we can do the same.This was the country that offered hope.This was the place where dreams could come true, not just economic dreams, but dreams of freedom, justice, and equality.We all need to hope that our dreams can come true.I challenge you to make it happen, because all our lives, not just mine, depend on it.Thank you.
第五篇：美国经典英文演讲100篇Truth_and_Tolerance_in_America
美国经典英文演讲100篇: “Truth and Tolerance in America”
Edward M.Kennedy Faith, Truth and Tolerance in America.Actually, a number of people in Washington were surprised that I was invited to speak here--and even more surprised when I accepted the invitation.They seem to think that it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for a Kennedy to come to the campus of Liberty Baptist College.In honor of our meeting, I have asked Dr.Falwell, as your Chancellor, to permit all the students an extra hour next Saturday night before curfew.And in return, I have promised to watch the Old Time Gospel Hour next Sunday morning.I realize that my visit may be a little controversial.But as many of you have heard, Dr.Falwell recently sent me a membership in the Moral Majority--and I didn't even apply for it.And I wonder if that means that I'm a member in good standing.[Falwell: Somewhat] Somewhat, he says.This is, of course, a nonpolitical speech which is probably best under the circumstances.Since I am not a candidate for President, it would certainly be inappropriate to ask for your support in this election and probably inaccurate to thank you for it in the last one.I have come here to discuss my beliefs about faith and country, tolerance and truth in America.I know we begin with certain disagreements;I strongly suspect that at the end of the evening some of our disagreements will remain.But I also hope that tonight and in the months and years ahead, we will always respect the right of others to differ, that we will never lose sight of our own fallibility, that we will view ourselves with a sense of
perspective and a sense of humor.After all, in the New Testament, even the Disciples had to be taught to look first to the beam in their own eyes, and only then to the mote in their neighbor’s eyes.I am mindful of that counsel.I am an American and a Catholic;I love my country and treasure my faith.But I do not assume that my conception of patriotism or policy is invariably correct, or that my convictions about religion should command any greater respect than any other faith in this pluralistic society.I believe there surely is such a thing as truth, but who among us can claim a monopoly on it? There are those who do, and their own words testify to their intolerance.For example, because the Moral Majority has worked with members of different denominations, one fundamentalist group has denounced Dr.Falwell for hastening the ecumenical church and for “yoking together with Roman Catholics, Mormons, and others.” I am relieved that Dr.Falwell does not regard that as a sin, and on this issue, he himself has become the target of narrow prejudice.When people agree on public policy, they ought to be able to work together, even while they worship in diverse ways.For truly we are all yoked together as Americans, and the yoke is the happy one of individual freedom and mutual respect.But in saying that, we cannot and should not turn aside from a deeper and more pressing question--which is whether and how religion should influence government.A generation ago, a presidential candidate had to prove his independence of undue religious influence in public life, and he had to do so partly at the insistence of evangelical Protestants.John Kennedy said at that time: “I believe in an America where there is no religious bloc voting of any kind.” Only twenty years later, another candidate was appealing to a[n] evangelical meeting as a religious bloc.Ronald Reagan said to 15 thousand evangelicals at the Roundtable in Dallas: “ I know that you can’t endorse me.I want you to know I endorse you and what you are doing.”
To many Americans, that pledge was a sign and a symbol of a dangerous breakdown in the separation of church and state.Yet this principle, as vital as it is, is not a simplistic and rigid command.Separation of church and state cannot mean an absolute separation between moral principles and political power.The challenge today is to recall the origin of the principle, to define its purpose, and refine its application to the politics of the present.The founders of our nation had long and bitter experience with the state, as both the agent and the adversary of particular religious views.In colonial Maryland, Catholics paid a double land tax, and in Pennsylvania they had to list their names on a public roll--an ominous precursor of the first Nazi laws against the Jews.And Jews in turn faced discrimination in all of the thirteen original Colonies.Massachusetts exiled Roger Williams and his congregation for contending that civil government had no right to enforce the Ten Commandments.Virginia harassed Baptist teachers, and also established a religious test for public service, writing into the law that no “popish followers” could hold any office.But during the Revolution, Catholics, Jews, and Non-Conformists all rallied to the cause and fought valiantly for the American commonwealth--for John Winthrop’s “city upon a hill.” Afterwards, when the Constitution was ratified and then amended, the framers gave freedom for all religion, and from any established religion, the very first place in the Bill of Rights.Indeed the framers themselves professed very different faiths: Washington was an Episcopalian, Jefferson a deist, and Adams a Calvinist.And although he had earlier opposed toleration, John Adams later contributed to the building of Catholic churches, and so did George Washington.Thomas Jefferson said his proudest achievement was not the presidency, or the writing the Declaration of Independence, but drafting the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom.He stated the vision of the first Americans and the First Amendment very clearly: “The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time.”
The separation of church and state can sometimes be frustrating for women and men of religious faith.They may be tempted to misuse government in order to impose a value which they cannot persuade others to accept.But once we succumb to that temptation, we step onto a slippery slope where everyone’s freedom is at risk.Those who favor censorship should recall that one of the first books ever burned was the first English translation of the Bible.As President Eisenhower warned in 1953, “Don’t join the book burners...the right to say ideas, the right to record them, and the right to have them accessible to others is unquestioned--or this isn’t America.” And if that right is denied, at some future day the torch can be turned against any other book or any other belief.Let us never forget: Today’s Moral Majority could become tomorrow’s persecuted minority.The danger is as great now as when the founders of the nation first saw it.In 1789, their fear was of factional strife among dozens of denominations.Today there are hundreds--and perhaps even thousands of faiths--and millions of Americans who are outside any fold.Pluralism obviously does not and cannot mean that all of them are right;but it does mean that there are areas where government cannot and should not decide what it is wrong to believe, to think, to read, and to do.As Professor Larry Tribe, one of the nation’s leading constitutional scholars has written, “Law in a non-theocratic state cannot measure religious truth, nor can the state impose it.“ The real transgression occurs when religion wants government to tell citizens how to live uniquely personal parts of their lives.The failure of Prohibition proves the futility of such an attempt when a majority or even a substantial minority happens to disagree.Some questions may be inherently individual ones, or people may be sharply divided about whether they are.In such cases, like Prohibition and abortion, the proper role of religion is to appeal to the conscience of the individual, not the coercive power of the state.But there are other questions which are inherently public in nature, which we must decide together as a nation, and where
religion and religious values can and should speak to our common conscience.The issue of nuclear war is a compelling example.It is a moral issue;it will be decided by government, not by each individual;and to give any effect to the moral values of their creed, people of faith must speak directly about public policy.The Catholic bishops and the Reverend Billy Graham have every right to stand for the nuclear freeze, and Dr.Falwell has every right to stand against it.There must be standards for the exercise of such leadership, so that the obligations of belief will not be debased into an opportunity for mere political advantage.But to take a stand at all when a question is both properly public and truly moral is to stand in a long and honored tradition.Many of the great evangelists of the 1800s were in the forefront of the abolitionist movement.In our own time, the Reverend William Sloane Coffin challenged the morality of the war in Vietnam.Pope John XXIII renewed the Gospel’s call to social justice.And Dr.Martin Luther King, Jr.who was the greatest prophet of this century, awakened our nation and its conscience to the evil of racial segregation.Their words have blessed our world.And who now wishes they had been silent? Who would bid Pope John Paul [II] to quiet his voice against the oppression in Eastern Europe, the violence in Central America, or the crying needs of the landless, the hungry, and those who are tortured in so many of the dark political prisons of our time? President Kennedy, who said that “no religious body should seek to impose its will,” also urged religious leaders to state their views and give their commitment when the public debate involved ethical issues.In drawing the line between imposed will and essential witness, we keep church and state separate, and at the same time we recognize that the City of God should speak to the civic duties of men and women.There are four tests which draw that line and define the difference.First, we must respect the integrity of religion itself.People of conscience should be careful how they deal in the word of their Lord.In our own history, religion has been falsely invoked to sanction prejudice--even slavery--to condemn labor unions and public spending for the poor.I believe that the prophecy, ”The poor you have always with you” is an indictment, not a commandment.And I respectfully suggest that God has taken no position on the Department of Education--and that a balanced budget constitutional amendment is a matter of economic analysis, and not heavenly appeals.Religious values cannot be excluded from every public issue;but not every public issue involves religious values.And how ironic it is when those very values are denied in the name of religion.For example, we are sometimes told that it is wrong to feed the hungry, but that mission is an explicit mandate given to us in the 25th chapter of Matthew.Second, we must respect the independent judgments of conscience.Those who proclaim moral and religious values can offer counsel, but they should not casually treat a position on a public issue as a test of fealty to faith.Just as I disagree with the Catholic bishops on tuition tax credits--which I oppose--so other Catholics can and do disagree with the hierarchy, on the basis of honest conviction, on the question of the nuclear freeze.Thus, the controversy about the Moral Majority arises not only from its views, but from its name--which, in the minds of many, seems to imply that only one set of public policies is moral and only one majority can possibly be right.Similarly, people are and should be perplexed when the religious lobbying group Christian Voice publishes a morality index of congressional voting records, which judges the morality of senators by their attitude toward Zimbabwe and Taiwan.Let me offer another illustration.Dr.Falwell has written--and I quote: “To stand against Israel is to stand against God.” Now
there is no one in the Senate who has stood more firmly for Israel than I have.Yet, I do not doubt the faith of those on the other side.Their error is not one of religion, but of policy.And I hope to be able to persuade them that they are wrong in terms of both America’s interest and the justice of Israel’s cause.Respect for conscience is most in jeopardy, and the harmony of our diverse society is most at risk, when we re-establish, directly or indirectly, a religious test for public office.That relic of the colonial era, which is specifically prohibited in the Constitution, has reappeared in recent years.After the last election, the Reverend James Robison warned President Reagan no to surround himself, as president before him had, “with the counsel of the ungodly.” I utterly reject any such standard for any position anywhere in public service.Two centuries ago, the victims were Catholics and Jews.In the 1980s the victims could be atheists;in some other day or decade, they could be the members of the Thomas Road Baptist Church.Indeed, in 1976 I regarded it as unworthy and un-American when some people said or hinted that Jimmy Carter should not be president because he was a born again Christian.We must never judge the fitness of individuals to govern on the bas[is] of where they worship, whether they follow Christ or Moses, whether they are called “born again” or “ungodly.” Where it is right to apply moral values to public life, let all of us avoid the temptation to be self-righteous and absolutely certain of ourselves.And if that temptation ever comes, let us recall Winston Churchill’s humbling description of an intolerant and inflexible colleague: “There but for the grace of God goes God.”
Third, in applying religious values, we must respect the integrity of public debate.In that debate, faith is no substitute for facts.Critics may oppose the nuclear freeze for what they regard as moral reasons.They have every right to argue that any negotiation with the Soviets is wrong, or that any accommodation with them sanctions their crimes, or that no agreement can be good enough and therefore all agreements only increase the chance of war.I do not believe that, but it surely does not violate the
standard of fair public debate to say it.What does violate that standard, what the opponents of the nuclear freeze have no right to do, is to assume that they are infallible, and so any argument against the freeze will do, whether it is false or true.The nuclear freeze proposal is not unilateral, but bilateral--with equal restraints on the United States and the Soviet Union.The nuclear freeze does not require that we trust the Russians, but demands full and effective verification.The nuclear freeze does not concede a Soviet lead in nuclear weapons, but recognizes that human beings in each great power already have in their fallible hands the overwhelming capacity to remake into a pile of radioactive rubble the earth which God has made.There is no morality in the mushroom cloud.The black rain of nuclear ashes will fall alike on the just and the unjust.And then it will be too late to wish that we had done the real work of this atomic age--which is to seek a world that is neither red nor dead.I am perfectly prepared to debate the nuclear freeze on policy grounds, or moral ones.But we should not be forced to discuss phantom issues or false charges.They only deflect us form the urgent task of deciding how best to prevent a planet divided from becoming a planet destroyed.And it does not advance the debate to contend that the arms race is more divine punishment than human problem, or that in any event, the final days are near.As Pope John said two decades ago, at the opening of the Second Vatican Council: “We must beware of those who burn with zeal, but are not endowed with much sense...we must disagree with the prophets of doom, who are always forecasting disasters, as though the end of the earth was at hand.” The message which echoes across the years is very clear: The earth is still here;and if we wish to keep it, a prophecy of doom is no alternative to a policy of arms control.Fourth, and finally, we must respect the motives of those who exercise their right to disagree.We sorely test our ability to live together if we readily question each other’s integrity.It may be harder to restrain our feelings when moral principles are at stake, for they go to the deepest wellsprings of our being.But the more our feelings diverge, the more deeply felt they are, the greater is our obligation to grant the sincerity and essential decency of our fellow citizens on the other side.Those who favor E.R.A [Equal Rights Amendment] are not “antifamily” or “blasphemers.” And their purpose is not “an attack on the Bible.” Rather, we believe this is the best way to fix in our national firmament the ideal that not only all men, but all people are created equal.Indeed, my mother, who strongly favors E.R.A., would be surprised to hear that she is anti-family.For my part, I think of the amendment’s opponents as wrong on the issue, but not as lacking in moral character I could multiply the instances of name-calling, sometimes on both sides.Dr.Falwell is not a “warmonger.” And “liberal clergymen” are not, as the Moral Majority suggested in a recent letter, equivalent to “Soviet sympathizers.” The critics of official prayer in public schools are not “Pharisees”;many of them are both civil libertarians and believers, who think that families should pray more at home with their children, and attend church and synagogue more faithfully.And people are not sexist because they stand against abortion, and they are not murderers because they believe in free choice.Nor does it help anyone’s cause to shout such epithets, or to try and shout a speaker down--which is what happened last April when Dr.Falwell was hissed and heckled at Harvard.So I am doubly grateful for your courtesy here this evening.That was not Harvard’s finest hour, but I am happy to say that the loudest applause from the Harvard audience came in defense of Dr.Falwell’s right to speak.In short, I hope for an America where neither ”fundamentalist“ nor ”humanist" will be a dirty word, but a fair description of the different ways in which people of good will look at life and into their own souls.I hope for an America where no president, no public official, no individual will ever be deemed a greater or lesser American because of religious doubt--or religious belief.I hope for an America where the power of faith will always burn brightly, but where no modern Inquisition of any kind will ever light the fires of fear, coercion, or angry division.I hope for an America where we can all contend freely and vigorously, but where we will treasure and guard those standards of civility which alone make this nation safe for both democracy and diversity.Twenty years ago this fall, in New York City, President Kennedy met for the last time with a Protestant assembly.The atmosphere had been transformed since his earlier address during the 1960 campaign to the Houston Ministerial Association.He had spoken there to allay suspicions about his Catholicism, and to answer those who claimed that on the day of his baptism, he was somehow disqualified from becoming President.His speech in Houston and then his election drove that prejudice from the center of our national life.Now, three years later, in November of 1963, he was appearing before the Protestant Council of New York City to reaffirm what he regarded as some fundamental truths.On that occasion, John Kennedy said: “The family of man is not limited to a single race or religion, to a single city, or country...the family of man is nearly 3 billion strong.Most of its members are not white and most of them are not Christian.” And as President Kennedy reflected on that reality, he restated an ideal for which he had lived his life--that “the members of this family should be at peace with one another.”
That ideal shines across all the generations of our history and all the ages of our faith, carrying with it the most ancient dream.For as the Apostle Paul wrote long ago in Romans: “If it be possible, as much as it lieth in you, live peaceable with all men.” I believe it is possible;the choice lies within us;as fellow citizens, let us live peaceable with each other;as fellow human
点击咨询 