關於 member at large中文 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

小編快報
《柏林脈動》（The Berlin Pulse) 今天出刊了。這是德國一年一度的外交及國際關係專刊。作者群包括學者、智庫專家、政府官員。

這一期談歐洲問題的作者有波蘭外長、Moldova 總理、德國國防部長等等等。

今年《脈動》特別做了中國專題，作者有五位，分別是：
中國的全國人大外事委員會副主任委員傅瑩、日本眾議會議員Minora Kiuchi、巴黎的中國問題專家Francois Godement、曾任澳洲駐華大使，現任外交及貿易秘書長的Frances Adamson，以及台灣的龍應台。

德國編輯在文末放了一個德國的民意調查圖表，提問是：「面對中國，你認為德國應該更強力保護自己的政治利益，即使犧牲經濟利益？」
答案：贊成 76%
反對 19%

小編把龍應台文章翻譯成中文，跟讀者分享。英文原文附在後面。如果嫌我翻譯得不好，那那那，那表示你英文很好，你就看英文吧......
——————————————————————
兩千三百萬人在獨木舟上
——為什麼歐洲應該關切台灣的未來

反對黨公布2020總統候選人名單的那一天，我在台北和知識圈的朋友們午餐。那悲觀的，用問句來表達自己的悲觀，譬如，「你覺得台灣還有多少年?」那樂觀的，用黑色幽默來表達樂觀，譬如，「感謝老天。香港讓他們太忙了，沒時間管台灣。」

跟德國一樣，台灣對中國大陸和香港的貿易順差，在2018年是831億美元。百分之四十一的對外貿易針對中國，中國大陸市場對台灣的重要不言而喻。然而，隨著近年來台灣海峽兩岸的關係緊張，反對黨(國民黨) 憂慮市場的優勢無法持續，而執政黨(民進黨) 則選擇強化選民對北京的不信任來抵制中國的影響力。執政黨最近提出的國安新法可能將任何被認定為為中國宣傳者入罪。

和歐洲一樣，台灣人對中國的感受也是複雜的。 當中國代表的是活躍的經濟機會時，很多台灣人就容易所謂「親中」，當中國代表的是壓迫和可能的入侵時，很多台灣人就是所謂的「反中」。問題是，中國兩者兼備。後果就是，台灣內部的分歧遠遠超過了僅只是政治和經濟的層面。

如果你知道台灣是如何一路走來的，你會覺得它今天變成一個民主社會真是一個不得了的成就。沒有革命，一黨獨裁四十年的國民黨，不管你說它是自願還是被迫，放下了政權，分享權力。沒有流血，昔日牢裡的政治犯變成今日的立法者和政治領袖。1987年解嚴以後，政權的交替基本上公平而有序地進行了三十年。

台灣安靜地進行了三十年的民主，時間幾乎和它的國際孤立一樣長。美國不承認台灣的國家地位，但是，就如同當年對於德國，美國也扮演了安全守護者的角色。令人不安的是，在美國宣布要把軍售台灣常態化的同時，中國也宣布，它在台灣海峽及其領空，要把軍艦和戰機的演習常態化。

所以台灣民主的威脅其實是雙重的。比較明顯的是中國的威脅，這個威脅，往往超出台灣本身的控制能力。一個不那麼明顯的威脅，卻是內部自製的。台灣的政治人物和政黨熱切拿這個威脅做為政治資本，刺激集體恐懼來強化部落式的愛國主義。這種操作的成功，對台灣的民主制度和機構本身，是個真實的危險。

國際上那些純粹為了攻擊中國而故意把台灣捧在手心讚美的人，其實讓我坐立不安。一代又一代的台灣人為民主付出了代價，很大的代價，而得到今天的成果。這個成果，太珍貴了，不可以變成別人或別國為了自己的利益而拿來玩弄的籌碼或棋子。

德國的歷史是特殊的。德國的人民親身目睹了，如果不戒慎恐懼地去維護，一個開放合理的社會制度是如何容易地瓦解，一夜之間可以被獨裁取代。經歷了二戰，又擺脫了共產黨的歷史爭取到自由，德國可能比很多其他國家更容易理解台灣人的困境和追求。道德勇氣的來源往往是歷史的痛苦。身為歐盟的重要成員，德國有責任為世界的和平做出最大的努力，發揮最大的影響力。

但是，歐洲憑什麼一定要關心台灣呢?

首先，如果沒有台灣模式，全世界大概就都得接受一種說法，就是，儒家文化和民主制度是無法相容的，而所謂「中國模式」就是唯一邏輯、不可避免的現代中國。台灣的存在證明了一件事：未必如此。

第二，台灣本身的努力值得世界的尊敬。沒錯，如果中國是一艘航空母艦，那麼台灣只不過是一葉孤零零的獨木舟。可是在這個獨木舟上有兩千三百萬人正在追求一種有自由、有尊嚴的生活方式。如果台灣是歐盟的一個成員，就人口論，台灣就是二十八個成員國(英國脫歐後二十七國)中第七大國，比波蘭稍小，但比荷蘭和比利時大。以經濟購買力來看，台灣更是名列全球第二十二。所以，歐洲可以想像剝奪波蘭人或者荷蘭人對生活方式和政治體制的選擇權利嗎?

23 Million People on a Canoe
—Why Europe should care about Taiwan’s future

Lung Yingtai

On the day when the opposition party announced its presidential candidate for the 2020 election, I was sitting at a lunch table in Taipei listening to my intellectual friends uttering their concerns about the future of Taiwan. The pessimists phrased their pessimism in the form of questions such as “How many years do you think Taiwan has left?” The optimists expressed their optimism with dark humour, “Thank God they will be too busy with Hong Kong and the US for a while.”

Like Germany, Taiwan operates a trade surplus with mainland China and Hong Kong, amounting to $83.1 billion in 2018. With 41% of Taiwan’s exports going to China, Taipei’s economy depends on trade with the mainland. However, given the increasing tension across the Taiwan Strait, the opposition Kuomintang (KMT) in particular has been worrying whether Taiwan will be able to sustain these figures. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party, on the other hand, is capitalizing on voters’ intense distrust of Beijing, stepping up measures to “contain” China’s influence. Taipei recently drafted a national security law that would make it a punishable offense to spread “political propaganda” for China.

As in Europe, Taiwanese feel highly ambivalent about mainland China: When China signifies economic opportunities, most Taiwanese are 23 Million People on a Canoe Why Europe should care about Taiwan’s future “pro-China”; when China represents oppression and potential invasion, most Taiwanese are “anti-China”. The problem is that China resembles both. The result is a deep division among Taiwanese extending far beyond the political and economic spheres.

Given the circumstances under which Taiwan emerged and evolved, its evolution into an authentic democracy represents an extraordinary achievement. It was without a revolution that the KMT, which had ruled Taiwan for more than 40 years, put an end to martial law and, whether convinced or compelled to act, opened the country’s political system to sharing power. Without bloodshed, dissidents who had once sat in jails became legislators and political leaders. Since the lifting of martial law 1987, power has changed hands fairly and orderly, following the results of each election.

Taiwan has been a quiet democracy for more than thirty years, nearly as long as the four decades during which it has been isolated by the international community. The US does not formally recognize Taiwan but, as with Germany, acts as the country’s security guarantor. While Washington has indicated that arms sales to Taiwan will become more of a routine, China has devised a routine of its own by holding long-range combat drills and ordering its fighter jets to cross the maritime line.

However, the threat to Taiwanese democracy is twofold. The obvious one comes from China, and to a large extent lies beyond Taipei’s control. The less obvious threat is home-made, as the looming China threat tempts domestic politicians to mobilize the population’s collective fear to foment a tribal nationalism. Their success would pose a real danger to Taiwan’s democratic institutions.

Those who applaud Taiwanese democracy for the sole purpose of criticizing China make me nervous. Generations of Taiwanese fought and ultimately achieved a democracy – it is simply too precious for other people’s agendas, internal or external.

Germany has a unique history: its people have experienced first-hand how easily democratic institutions may fall apart when not meticulously guarded. Having received democracy as a gift following World War II and struggled to regain their freedom from Communist rule, Germans are in a unique position to understand both the predicament as well as the aspirations of the Taiwanese. Moral courage often comes from past sufferings. As a leading EU member state, Germany has a responsibility to maximize its own efforts as well as to influence others’ efforts for world peace.

But why should the world care about the future of Taiwan? First of all, save the Taiwan model, the world might have to accept the claim that democracy and Confucianism are incompatible, and that a communist China presents the only logical and inevitable path to modernity. Secondly, Taiwan deserves respect on its own merits. True, if China were an aircraft carrier, Taiwan would be a lone canoe. But standing on this canoe are 23 million people aspiring for a life with liberty and dignity. If it were an EU member, Taiwan would be the 7th largest of the Union’s 28 member-states (27 after Brexit), smaller than Poland but larger than the Netherlands or Belgium, with a developed economy ranking 22nd in the world by purchasing power parity. Do we really want to return to a world in which it is imaginable that countries such as Poland or the Netherlands should be deprived of their autonomy to determine their own way of life and political system?

The Berlin Pulse 2019
龍應台專文：https://www.koerber-stiftung.de/fileadmin/user_upload/koerber-stiftung/redaktion/the-berlin-pulse/pdf/2019/3_Koerber_TheBerlinPulse_YingTai.pdf
全本：https://www.koerber-stiftung.de/fileadmin/user_upload/koerber-stiftung/redaktion/the-berlin-pulse/pdf/2019/TheBerlinPulse_2019_FINAL.pdf

1. 好想瘋狂比梁美芬
2. 我倍感安慰

【人必自侮然後人侮之──中大學生會及中大書院學生會就梁美芬女士之謬論之聯合聲明｜“One Loses One’s Respect From Others Because One Has No Respect For Oneself” - Statement from the CUHK Joint Student Unions on Ms. Leung Mei-fun Priscilla’s Farcical Comments】

(Please scroll down for English version)

在六月二十六日的立法會會議中，作為香港中文大學校友的梁美芬女士稱「中文大學是中國人的大學」，並謂「任何違反國家利益的事都違背中大精神」。我等對梁美芬女士扭曲中大歷史、貶低中大精神之言論表示強烈遺憾。

我校之所以命名為「香港中文大學」，是因為我校以傳揚中華文化為己任，並希望提高中文於殖民地時期的地位。我校創校校長李卓敏博士曾於1978年中大第十九屆頒授學位典禮上解釋道，中文大學是指「傳揚中國文化的大學」，而當中的「中國」絕非指共產黨建立的「中華人民共和國」。1949年後，大批難民為了逃避共產政權之魔掌由北方湧入香港，包括中大的創校先賢。他們之所以創建中大，正為了抵抗中共的文化破壞，希望為中華文化留下一點命脈，而新亞書院創辦人之一錢穆先生就曾把中大比喻為「中華文化花果飄零到香港的最後種子」。因此，中大絕非梁所指的「中國人的大學」，更非維護中華人民共和國利益之大學。恰恰相反，中大是為了抗共而生。

梁美芬女士作為中大校友，甚至曾任聯合書院學生會會長及中大學生會幹事，竟對創校歷史背景一無所知，實在枉為中大人。梁擅自把中文大學與「中國人的大學」畫上等號，甚至把中大精神貶至維護國家利益，於議事堂上大言不慚，實在不知所謂，亦是對我校眾創校先賢之侮辱。「人必自侮然後人侮之。」作為中大人，我等強烈譴責梁美芬女士愚昧無知之言論；作為香港人，我等以有質素如此低劣的代議士為恥。

中大多年來致力提升學子之人文關懷及公民意識，培育出一代又一代關心香港、積極參與社會運動的中大人。每一場的民主運動，包括當下的「反送中」運動，中大人從不缺席，正正表現出中大人守護香港之決心。偏偏梁在中共政權下搖尾乞憐，處處出賣港人，其所作所為令人不齒，我等恥與為伍。

我校創校先賢正是懷着對自由的渴求、追求真理的精神，千辛萬苦創建了中大，作為中大學生，我等定必竭力捍衛我城之自由，以一己努力改革社會，不辜負前人的期許。

二零一九年六月二十九日

香港中文大學學生會
香港中文大學逸夫書院學生會
香港中文大學善衡書院學生會
香港中文大學崇基學院學生會
香港中文大學新亞書院學生會
香港中文大學聯合書院學生會幹事會
香港中文大學和聲書院學生會幹事會

In a Legislative Council meeting on 26 June, CUHK alumna Ms. Leung Mei-fun Priscilla claimed that the Chinese University of Hong Kong is a “university for Chinese people”, and “anything against national interests is also against the spirit of CUHK”. We strongly condemn Ms. Leung’s distortion of CUHK’s history as well as her disrespect for the CUHK spirit.

Our school was named “the Chinese University of Hong Kong” because it took the promotion of Chinese culture as its responsibility, with the objective of elevating the status of Chinese as a language in the colonial times. Founding Vice-Chancellor Dr. Li Choh-Ming explained this in 1978, at the 19th CUHK Congregation for the Conferment of Degrees, that the Chinese University of Hong Kong is a university that promotes Chinese culture, and ‘Chinese’ in this context has not in the slightest to do with People’s Republic of China established by Chinese communists. After 1949, a large number of refugees flooded to Hong Kong in order to escape the northern communist regime, including founders of CUHK. They specifically established CUHK so as to withstand Chinese Communist cultural invasion, hoping to preserve the lifeline of the Chinese culture. New Asia College founder Dr. Chi’en Mu described CUHK as “the final seed of the Chinese culture drifted to the soil of Hong Kong”. Therefore, CUHK is nothing close to what Ms. Leung claimed to be as an institution protecting the national interests of the People’s Republic of China. In contrast, CUHK was established to fight against Chinese communism.

As an alumna of CUHK, as well as former United College Student’s Union President and former CUSU committee member, it is absolutely disgraceful how ignorant Ms. Leung is. Her false and loathsome claims were terrible insults to our founders. One loses one’s respect from others because one has no respect for oneself. As CUHKers, we strongly condemn Ms. Leung for her idiotic comments, and are shameful to have her as a Legislative Councillor.

CUHK strived to promote the spirit of humanism and social consciousness over the years, nurturing generations of CUHKers who love Hong Kong and participate in social movements, including the “No Extradition to China Movement” taking place at the moment. CUHKers have never been absent in these events, which demonstrates the courage and willingness of CUHKers to protect and contribute to their home. Despite so, it is unfortunate that the likes of Ms. Leung exist among us, wagging her tail begging for mercy from a tyrannical regime.

The founders of CUHK established our alma mater seeking for freedom and longing for truth, CUHK students should do whatever it takes to protect our freedom, so as to meet our predecessor’s expectations.

29 June 2019

The Student Union of the Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Student Union of Shaw College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Student Union, Chung Chi College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Student Union of New Asia College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Executive Committee, Student Union of United College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Executive Committee, Student Union of Lee Woo Sing College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

【亞洲究竟何時才會通過同性婚姻？】（中譯）

Foreign Policy 於日前（11/30) 刊出專文報導台灣婚姻平權法案進程，文章以伴侶盟發起「婚姻平權革命陣線」，於 2014/10/5 彩虹圍城行動中，群眾把婚姻平權四個大球推入立院作為開頭。精要勾勒了近年來台灣婚姻平權發展簡史，並詳盡分析了目前法案風雲詭譎的政治情勢，報導也委婉但明確點出，婚姻平權法案的通過與否，正在考驗著蔡總統的領導能力與政治誠信。

原文 參見
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/30/marriage-equality-in-taiwan-isnt-a-done-deal-tsai-ing-wen-legislation-lgbt-taipei/?wp_login_redirect=0
作者/LINDA VAN DER HORST
2016年11月30日
中文翻譯：Tasha Chang

標題：When Will Asia Finally Have Same-Sex Marriage?
亞洲究竟何時才會通過同性婚姻？？
Taiwan is on the verge of becoming the first Asian government to legalize marriage equality. But the public is deeply divided.
台灣即將成為亞洲第一個同性婚姻合法化的國家，但輿論仍高度分歧。
In October 2014, a crowd at an LGBT rights rally in Taipei, one of many, lobbed four large red balloons emblazoned with the Chinese characters for marriage equality into the fenced courtyard of Taiwan’s legislature. At that time, a comfortable majority of Taiwanese supported same-sex marriage; a number of polls in the self-governing island of 23 million indicated as much, with one showing as many as 71 percent in favor. But several initiatives to amend the law to achieve marriage equality, first mooted in 2003, have not been successful. Two years later, three marriage equality bills now sit on legislators’ desks; although international media have been quick to announce that Taiwan stands on the cusp of being the first government in Asia to achieve marriage equality, the island’s public seems deeply divided. In the latest poll on the subject, released on Nov. 29, 46 percent of respondents supported marriage equality, while 45 percent opposed it. Meanwhile, Taiwan’s lawmakers and its civil society have been more cautious than recent headlines in Western media suggest.

2014年10月，在架起拒馬的立法院外，有一大群為了同志權益發聲的群眾，高推著四顆分別寫著「婚」、「姻」、「平」、「權」四字的紅色大球，推往立法院的方向。當時，在有著2,300萬人口的台灣，有絕大多數民眾都支持婚姻平權，幾個民意調查也顯示同樣的結果，其中有個調查的支持度甚至還高達71%。然而，最早於2003年所發動，接續欲修法以達成婚姻平權的數個提案，最後都無疾而終。兩年後，三套版本的婚姻平權法案現正擺在立法委員的案前等待審議。雖然國際媒體迅速下了判斷宣告台灣即將成為亞洲第一個達成婚姻平權的國家，但台灣的民意似乎仍高度分歧。最近一次於今年11月29日公布的一份調查指出，46%的受訪者支持婚姻平權，另有45%的受訪者表示反對。同時，相較於西方國際媒體樂觀的報導走向，台灣的立法委員與公民社會的態度反而較為小心謹慎。

Island-wide marriage equality initiatives have been unsuccessful in spite of growing support over decades. Even without national legislation, many local governments in Taiwan now allow same-sex couples to participate in collective weddings and to record their partnership in household registries across the island, although neither action confers any legal rights.

過去數十年，即便婚姻平權的支持度越來越高，推動婚姻平權的行動卻屢遭挫敗。雖然中央尚未立法保障同志權益，台灣有許多地方政府已開放同性伴侶參與聯合婚禮並開放同性伴侶註記，然無論是聯合婚禮還是同性伴侶註記，皆未能給予同性伴侶法律上的權利。

To many, the election of President Tsai Ing-wen and her Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in January portended a broader, deeper change. Tsai openly made statements that appeared to support marriage equality during and after her campaign. In an October 2015 Facebook video posted to coincide with Taipei’s annual LGBT pride parade, Tsai exclaimed, “Everyone is equal before love.” A year later, she posted a photo on her Facebook page showing a rainbow, adding that her “belief has not changed” post-election. In August, Tsai appointed the first transgender official in government, Audrey Tang, as executive councilor for digital policy, which looked like another step toward acceptance of different gender norms.

對於許多人來說，現任總統蔡英文與其所屬政黨民主進步黨（民進黨）在一月總統大選的勝選，預告了更大幅度、更深程度的改變。無論是在選舉期間或當選後，蔡英文數次公開發表支持婚姻平權的文章。2015年10月，為響應臺北的年度同志大遊行，蔡英文的臉書發表了一支影片，影片中的蔡英文說道：「在愛之前，大家都是平等的。」一年過後，她在臉書上發佈了一則彩虹橫跨天際的照片，補充道：「雖然我的身分變了，但是我相信的價值沒有改變」，強調選後立場沒有改變。今年八月，蔡英文內閣任命首位跨性別官員唐鳳擔任政務委員，督導數位經濟與開放政府。此舉看來又是另一個接納不同性別典範的舉措。

Since Tsai took office this May, pressure has been building on her to deliver.
自蔡英文五月就任後，要求實現承諾的壓力升高

Since Tsai took office this May, pressure has been building on her to deliver. Yet she has never explicitly promised that her administration would push for same-sex marriage legislation, and critics have feared that once in office, she would find herself unable to follow through on her progressive rhetoric. The party that Tsai leads, the DPP, “has neither devoted sufficient resources to communicate the issues of marriage equality nor to reconcile differences within the party,” Victoria Hsu, who heads the nonprofit Taiwan Alliance to Promote Civil Partnership Rights (TAPCPR), told Foreign Policy.

蔡英文自今年五月就任後，要求她實現承諾的壓力不斷升高。然而，蔡英文卻從來沒有公開承諾她的行政團隊會推動婚姻平權的立法，批評者認為，一旦就任，蔡英文就無法堅持實現她過往曾發表過充滿進步性的言論。非營利組織台灣伴侶權益推動聯盟理事長許秀雯向《外交政策》表示，「蔡總統所領導的民進黨一直沒有真正投注夠多的資源在婚姻平權議題之上，或去溝通與化解黨內歧見。」

It was therefore a setback when Justice Minister Chiu Tai-san announced in August that his ministry still intended to introduce its own same-sex partnership bill — but only in 2017, after studying the impact of such a law on Taiwanese society. (In Taiwan, ministries can introduce bills into the legislature.) The effort dates back to the previous, more socially conservative Kuomintang (KMT) administration of Ma Ying-jeou and is an attempt to compromise between supporters of marriage equality and religious groups opposed. Proposing a separate law for same-sex partnership is politically easier, as it leaves the institution of marriage as currently constituted unchanged.

於是，當法務部長邱太三在八月宣布，經過研究相關法律對於台灣社會的影響，法務部仍傾向在2017年推出同性伴侶法時（台灣的行政部門可自行推出法案送進立法院審議），對於同志社群來說是一大挫敗。推行同性伴侶法可溯及較為保守的國民黨馬英九政府當權時期，用意在面對支持婚姻平權的群眾與反對婚姻平權的宗教團體中取得妥協。對於當政者而言，推動同性伴侶專法因未修改現行婚姻制度，在政治上的壓力較小。

In the absence of strong top-down leadership on the issue from Tsai, momentum for the bills currently under consideration has come from the bottom up. Audrey Ko, the chief editor of Womany, an online media outlet focused on gender issues and LGBT rights, says a stigma remains for gays and lesbians in Taiwan, one her company seeks to dispel. Other organizations, such as the Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBT) Hotline Association, perform peer counseling and advocacy work. Even corporations are chipping in; in March, McDonald’s released a commercial in which a son comes out to his father in one of its restaurants. (The father accepts it.)

缺少蔡英文「從上而下」貫徹的領導力，對於三個版本婚姻平權法案的支持聲量多來自「由下而上」的力量。關注性別與同志議題的線上媒體女人迷總編輯柯采岑表示，臺灣的同志族群還是被污名化，而女人迷就是想要破除此種污名；其他的組織例如台灣同志諮詢熱線協會則提供同志諮詢服務與倡議。企業也紛紛響應婚姻平權的議題。今年三月，在麥當勞發表的電視廣告中，有一個兒子在麥當勞向自己的父親出櫃（而父親也接受他了）。

This summer, a number of Taiwanese pop artists organized a benefit concert to raise awareness for marriage equality; tickets sold out in minutes. Pop superstar Jolin Tsai performed a lesbian-themed song for the occasion. In the music video for the song “We’re All Different, Yet the Same,” she makes the case for marriage equality by describing the plight of a woman whose partner of more than 30 years is hospitalized; the woman is unable to sign a consent form for emergency surgery because she is legally not a spouse or family member.

今年夏天，有多個臺灣流行音樂藝人組織了一場為婚姻平權而唱的公益演唱會，演唱會門票一開賣就在幾分鐘內售罄。流行樂天后蔡依林在該場演唱會中也演出以女同志為主題的歌。在她的「不一樣又怎樣」的MV中，描述了一對相守30年的女同志伴侶，其中一位因病住院，然她的伴侶卻無法在她需要進行緊急手術時簽署手術同意書，因為她的伴侶並不具有配偶或是親屬的身份。

A real-life version of this tragedy triggered public outcry and reinvigorated support for marriage equality. On Oct. 16, 67-year-old French professor Jacques Picoux fell to his death from the top of a 10-story building in Taipei, police said. He is thought to have committed suicide after depression caused by the death of his partner due to cancer; Picoux was unable to make medical decisions for his partner in his final days, as Picoux had no legal status. In a response to this outcry, legislators from the DPP and the KMT, as well as the caucus of the New Power Party (NPP), a young activist organization, all introduced similar marriage equality bills.

此種悲劇的真實案例引發了社會上強烈的抗議聲浪，推動婚姻平權運動更進一步。在今年10月16日，據警方表示，67歲的法國籍教授畢安生（Jacques Picoux）從位於台北的10樓住家一躍而下身亡。據悉，他有可能是因長期伴侶因癌症過世所引發的憂鬱症而自殺。當畢安生的伴侶在癌症末期時，因他沒有法律地位而無法替伴侶做醫療決定。為了回應關於婚姻平權的呼聲，民進黨與國民黨的立委以及由年輕的社運組織所組成的時代力量的黨團都推出了類似的婚姻平權法案。

All three proposals would amend the Taiwan Civil Code to open marriage to same-sex couples, but they differ in how to do so. DPP legislator Yu Mei-nu’s proposal introduces a general provision extending to same-sex couples the right to marriage, as well as other family law rights that accompany married status. But it leaves further gendered language across the civil code intact. The proposals of KMT legislator Hsu Yu-ren and the NPP would make references to “husband and wife” and “father and mother” gender-neutral throughout all relevant civil code provisions. These latter two proposals have great symbolic meaning, because they remove a heterosexual presumption from the code, but the legal effect is likely no different than Yu’s proposal.

這三個提案都主張修改民法將婚姻制度對同性伴侶開放，但對於如何開放則各有其詮釋。民進黨尤美女的版本採用一概括條款(註：新增民法971-1條)使同性配偶適用夫妻、父母子女等相關權利義務，但保留了民法中「性別化」的法律用語，未加修改。國民黨立委許毓仁與時代力量黨團的版本則將「夫妻」、「父母」等現行民法中的用語性別中立化。許毓仁與時代力量的版本，將異性戀預設的用語「性別中立化」而具有重大的象徵性意義，但若在法律適用結果而論，三個版本並無太大差異。

There is still a long legislative road to travel before Taiwan can become the first Asian government to legalize same-sex marriage. The bills passed their first reading on Nov. 17, but the DPP caucus whip has said the proposed bills will next be reviewed on Dec. 26. During the review process, any legislator can introduce a competing same-sex partnership act. Even if the bills were to enter a second reading, they could still face a boycott and be removed from the agenda. The bills will only become legislation after passing three readings.

臺灣要成為亞洲第一個將同性婚姻合法化的國家，仍有一大段立法之路要走。婚姻平權三版本的民法修正案都在今年11月17日通過了立法院一讀，而民進黨黨團總召表示，下一次審議的時間為12月26日。在審查過程中，任何一位立法委員都可以提出同性伴侶法作為對案。即便三個版本的婚姻平權法案進入了二讀，也還是有可能面臨杯葛而無法排進立法院的議程中。這三個版本的法案要通過三讀才有可能正式成為法律。

As these bills went through their first reading in the legislature this month, thousands of people protesting against marriage equality, and only several hundred rallying for it, gathered on Taipei’s streets.

當三個版本的法案本月在立法院通過一讀後，上千名反對婚姻平權的民眾走上台北街頭集結，當天支持婚姻平權而上街的民眾僅數百人。

As these bills went through their first reading in the legislature this month, thousands of people protesting against marriage equality, and only several hundred rallying for it, gathered on Taipei’s streets. Opposition to marriage equality in Taiwan largely comes from small but well-organized and vocal conservative religious groups. Four people reportedly even managed to storm into the legislative meeting room, shouting that the “legislators are monsters” and would want to change Taiwan “into an AIDS island.”

這三個版本的法案本月都在立法院通過一讀，為此，上千名反對婚姻平權的民眾走上台北街頭集結，然當天上街支持婚姻平權的民眾卻只有數百人。在台灣，大部分反對婚姻平權的民眾來自規模小但組織嚴密且發言聲量大的保守宗教團體。據報載，甚至有四名反對修法的民眾嘗試要衝進立法院司法及法制委員會的會議室，高喊著：「立委都是怪獸」、台灣要變「愛滋島」。

It is hard to tell whether the legislature will pass a same-sex marriage bill this time, says Hsu of TAPCPR, partly because of internal opposition within the DPP and KMT. (The NPP caucus fully supports its bill but only holds five seats in legislature.) Tsai has reiterated that the bills are “clear evidence” marriage equality has support across all parties. But even Yu, who introduced the DPP bill, says she is only cautiously optimistic about the chances of passing a marriage equality law.

台灣伴侶權益推動聯盟理事長許秀雯表示，現在沒有辦法預知立法院是否會通過婚姻平權法案，情勢走向如何，真的很難說。因為主要政黨國民黨及民進黨的立委雖然都有提出婚姻平權民法修正案，但這兩個黨裡面也都有反對者（時代力量雖然全黨都支持婚姻平權，在立法院內也只有五個席次）。蔡英文總統數度表示，不同版本婚姻平權法案的推出，即為此議題獲得跨黨派支持的「明證」。然而，即便是推出民進黨版本婚姻平權法案的尤美女立委也表示，對於婚姻平權是否能過關成為法律，她仍只抱持審慎樂觀的態度。

Outside lawmakers’ offices, the battle for public support continues. If anything, it seems to be waning precisely at the time when it will be most needed. “More and more people are confessing that they love gays but that they don’t support same-sex marriage,” said Ko, because they believe allowing same-sex partners to get married will harm traditional family values. She is therefore unsure whether Taiwan will manage to pass a bill in the next year. At least, Ko added, “people are talking [about it], and it is not a taboo anymore.”

在立法委員的辦公室外，爭取民意支持的戰爭仍未停歇。若真要說，此時此刻婚姻平權運動最需要的是什麼？大概就是更多的支持。女人迷總編輯柯采岑表示，「有越來越多人坦白表示，他們愛同志但是不支持婚姻平權」，因為他們認為，若同性伴侶可以結婚，將損害傳統家庭價值。」她也說，不確定臺灣能否在明年內通過婚姻平權法案。她補充：「但至少，大家都開始討論（婚姻平權法案）了，這再也不是禁忌了。」