【正文】 sident, it would certainly be inappropriate to ask for your support in this election and probably inaccurate to thank you for it in the last have e here to discuss my beliefs about faith and country, tolerance and truth in know we begin with certain disagreements。as fellow human第二篇：美國(guó)經(jīng)典英文演講100篇Truth_and_Tolerance_in_America美國(guó)經(jīng)典英文演講100篇: “Truth and Tolerance in America”Edward Faith, Truth and Tolerance in America [AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio.] Thank you very much Professor Kombay for that generous let me say, that I never expected to hear such kind words from in return, I have an invitation of my January 20th, 1985, I hope will say a prayer at the inauguration of the next Democratic President of the United , , I’m not exactly sure how you feel about might not appreciate the President, but the Democrats certainly would appreciate the , a number of people in Washington were surprised that I was invited to speak hereand even more surprised when I accepted the seem to think that it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for a Kennedy to e to the campus of Liberty Baptist honor of our meeting, I have asked , as your Chancellor, to permit all the students an extra hour next Saturday night before in return, I have promised to watch the Old Time Gospel Hour next Sunday realize that my visit may be a little as many of you have heard, recently sent me a membership in the Moral Majorityand I didn39。the choice lies within us。and if we wish to keep it, a prophecy of doom is no alternative to a policy of arms , and finally, we must respect the motives of those who exercise their right to sorely test our ability to live together if we readily question each other’s may be harder to restrain our feelings when moral principles are at stake, for they go to the deepest wellsprings of our 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 who favor [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 , my mother, who strongly favors ., would be surprised to hear that she is 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 namecalling, sometimes on both is not a “warmonger.” And “l(fā)iberal 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”。but not every public issue involves religious how ironic it is when those very values are denied in the name of 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 , we must respect the independent judgments of 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 as I disagree with the Catholic bishops on tuition tax creditswhich I opposeso other Catholics can and do disagree with the hierarchy, on the basis of honest conviction, on the question of the nuclear , the controversy about the Moral Majority arises not only from its views, but from its namewhich, in the minds of many, seems to imply that only one set of public policies is moral and only one majority can possibly be , 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 me offer another has writtenand I quote: “To stand against Israel is to stand against God.” Nowthere is no one in the Senate who has stood more firmly for Israel than I , I do not doubt the faith of those on the other error is not one of religion, but of 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 for conscience is most in jeopardy, and the harmony of our diverse society is most at risk, when we reestablish, directly or indirectly, a religious test for public relic of the colonial era, which is specifically prohibited in the Constitution, has reappeared in recent 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 centuries ago, the victims were Catholics and the 1980s the victims could be atheists。it will be decided by government, not by each individual。I love my country and treasure my I do not assume that my conception of patriotism or policy is invariably correct, or that my convictions about religion should mand any greater respect than any other faith in this pluralistic 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 example, because the Moral Majority has worked with members of different denominations, one fundamentalist group has denounced for hastening the ecumenical church and for “yoking together with Roman Catholics, Mormons, and others.” I am relieved that does not regard that as a sin, and on this issue, he himself has bee the target of narrow people agree on public policy, they ought to be able to work together, even while they worship in diverse truly we are all yoked together as Americans, and the yoke is the happy one of individual freedom and mutual in saying that, we cannot and should not turn aside from a deeper and more pressing questionwhich is whether and how religion sho