美国建国文献和著名演讲段落是新SAT考试中的一大重点，如何理解这些文献和演讲应该引起考生们的关注，今天新东方网SAT频道为大家带来新东方教师独家制作的新SAT阅读必读演讲解析，希望对同学们有所帮助。
安东尼《论女性选举权》评析
北美项目部宋宵
苏珊·宝莱·安东尼(Susan B. Anthony 1820-1906)，美国女权运动先驱。与伊丽莎白·卡迪·斯坦顿(Elizabeth Cady Stanton)同为妇女运动的领袖。她生于马萨诸塞，曾任教师，早年组织过禁酒团体。1854 年后积极从事反对奴隶制运动和女权运动，是美国废奴协会代言人(1856—1861)。内战结束后全力为妇女参政而斗争。1869年5月和斯坦顿一起组建全美妇女选举权协会。1890 年该会与全美女权运动联合会合并，后任会长(1892—1900)。1888 年组织国际妇女理事会。1904 年在柏林创建国际女权运动联盟。与斯坦顿和 M.J.盖奇合著《妇女参政史》(4卷本)。
安东尼是一位出色的演说家，曾被美国《展示》杂志评为近百年世界八大演说家之一。1872 年，女性尚无法享有投票权，为要求妇女也取得宪法第 14 条、15 条修正案赋予黑人男子同样的公民权和政治权利，安东尼带领一批妇女到投票站强行参加总统选举投票，遭到逮捕和审讯，并被判罚一百美元，引起轩然大波。
此文即为她在法庭上为自己所作的辩护，是一篇出色的辩护演说。演讲开头，作者先开门见山，声明自己无罪，并且只是在行使自己的公民权利。接下来第二三段便引用宪法，第四段继而对宪法进行阐释，声明女性公民也是组成这个联邦的人民的一员。第五段笔锋一转，反向论述把性别作为参加选举的资格这种行为可能会导致的后果。第六段引用权威，结尾段提出问题，如果妇女是人，那么也就是公民既然是公民，就应享有权利。末句使用类比，指出法律中存在的歧视女性的条款和歧视黑人的法律是一样无效的。
本演讲思路清晰，掷地有声，作者援引宪法，肯定妇女作为公民应有选举权;又援引关于公民的权利定义，指出妇女无疑是公民。作者以无可辩驳的论证痛斥了所谓妇女参加总统选举违法的指控，充分显示了一位女权运动先驱的才华和机智。演讲最后，安东尼将妇女投票权与黑人解放相比较，为女性解放事业找到了合适的类比，增加了主张的可接受度。由于安东尼以及其他女性斗志的持续争取，美国终于在1920年8月通过了第19宪法修正案，赋予女性投票权。
演讲原文：
On Women’s Right to Vote
In the 1800s, women in the United States had few legal rights and did not have the right to vote. This speech was given by Susan B. Anthony after her arrest for casting an illegal vote in the presidential election of 1872. She was tried and then fined $100 but refused to pay.
Friends and fellow citizens:
I stand before you tonight under indictment for the alleged crime of having voted at the last presidentialelection, without having a lawful right to vote. It shall be my work this evening to prove to you that in thus voting, I not only committed no crime, but, instead, simply exercised my citizen's rights, guaranteed to me and all United States citizens by the National Constitution, beyond the power of any state to deny.
The preamble of the Federal Constitution says:
"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union. And we formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them; not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to the whole people - women as well as men. And it is a downright mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing them provided by this democratic-republican government - the ballot.
For any state to make sex a qualification that must ever result in the disfranchisement of one entire half of the people, is to pass a bill of attainder, or, an ex post facto law, and is therefore a violation of the supreme law of the land. By it the blessings of liberty are forever withheld from women and their female posterity.
To them this government has no just powers derived from the consent of the governed. To them this government is not a democracy. It is not a republic. It is an odious aristocracy; a hateful oligarchy of sex; the most hateful aristocracy ever established on the face of the globe; an oligarchy of wealth, where the rich govern the poor. An oligarchy of learning, where the educated govern the ignorant, or even an oligarchy of race, where the Saxon rules the African, might be endured; but this oligarchy of sex, which makes father, brothers, husband, sons, the oligarchs over the mother and sisters, the wife and daughters, of every household - which ordains all men sovereigns, all women subjects, carries dissension, discord, and rebellion into every home of the nation.
Webster, Worcester, and Bouvier all define a citizen to be a person in the United States, entitled to vote and hold office.
The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons? And I hardly believe any of our opponents will have the hardihood to say they are not. Being persons, then, women are citizens; and no state has a right to make any law, or to enforce any old law, that shall abridge their privileges or immunities. Hence, every discrimination against women in the constitutions and laws of the several states is today null and void, precisely as is every one against Negroes.
Susan B. Anthony – 1873
译文：
论妇女选举权
1873 年
朋友们，公民们：
今晚我站在你们面前，被控在最近的总统选举中因没有法定权利而参加投票，犯有所谓选举罪。今晚我要向你们证明，我参加这次选举不但没有犯罪，相反，我只是行使了我的公民权。国家宪法确保我和全体合众国公民拥有公民权，任何一个州都无权剥夺。
联邦宪法的序言写道：
“我们合众国人民，为建设更完善的联邦，树立正义，保障国内安定，筹设共同防务，增进公共福利，确保我们自己及子孙后代永享自由幸福，特为美利坚合众国制订本宪法。”
组成这个联邦的，是我们人民，不是男性白人公民，也不是男性公民，而是我们全体人民。我们组成这个联邦，不仅是为了赐予自由幸福，而且是为了确保自由幸福;不只是为了确保我们自己的一半人及子孙后代中的一半人的自由幸福，而且是为了确保全体人民——包括女人和男人在内的自由幸福。参加投票是这个民主共和政体所提供的确保公民自由幸福的唯一手段因此，一面侈谈妇女享有自由幸福。一面又剥夺了她们的投票权，这是一个莫大的讽刺。
任何州政府，如果把性别作为参加选举的资格，必然导致人民中的整整一半被剥夺公民权。这等于通过一项剥夺公民权的法令或一项具有追溯效力的法令。因此，这样做违背了我国的最高法律，使得妇女及其后代中的所有女性被永远剥夺了自由幸福。对于女性来说，这个政府也就不具有来自被统治者赞同的正当权力。对于她们来说，这个政府不是民主政体，也不是共和政体，而是可憎的专制，是可恶的性别独裁，是地球上迄今为止最可恨的专制。因为，有钱人统治穷人的富人独裁，受教育者统治无知者的知识独裁，甚至撒克逊人统治非洲人的种族独裁，人们或许尚能忍受。但是这种性别独裁，却使得每家每户父亲、兄弟、丈夫、儿子成为母亲、姐妹、妻子、女儿的统治者，使一切男子至高无上，一切女人沦为奴婢。因而给全国的每家每户带来不和、纷争和反叛。
韦伯斯特、伍斯特和布维尔都认为，所谓合众国公民，就是有权投票和有权供职的美国人。现在唯一要解决的问题是：妇女是不是人?我相信，任何反对我们的人都不敢斗胆说妇女不是人。妇女既然是人，那么也就是公民。无论哪一个州都无权制定某种法律，或重操某种旧法律，来剥夺妇女的特权和豁免权。因此，一些州的宪法和法律中所有歧视妇女的条款，如同所有歧视黑人的条款一样，都是无效的，无用的。
注：译文自《美国历史文献》秦文勇译 王建华校
解析参考《世界经典英语演讲》周铭王赟主编
相关推荐：
