Answer:
Family life is changing. Two-parent households are on the decline in the United States as divorce, remarriage and cohabitation are on the rise. And families are smaller now, both due to the growth of single-parent households and the drop in fertility. Not only are Americans having fewer children, but the circumstances surrounding parenthood have changed. While in the early 1960s babies typically arrived within a marriage, today fully four-in-ten births occur to women who are single or living with a non-marital partner. At the same time that family structures have transformed, so has the role of mothers in the workplace – and in the home. As more moms have entered the labor force, more have become breadwinners – in many cases, primary breadwinners – in their families.
As a result of these changes, there is no longer one dominant family form in the U.S. Parents today are raising their children against a backdrop of increasingly diverse and, for many, constantly evolving family forms. By contrast, in 1960, the height of the post-World War II baby boom, there was one dominant family form. At that time 73% of all children were living in a family with two married parents in their first marriage. By 1980, 61% of children were living in this type of family, and today less than half (46%) are. The declining share of children living in what is often deemed a “traditional” family has been largely supplanted by the rising shares of children living with single or cohabiting parents.
Explanation:
The correct answer is <em>option c. Illegal</em>. In 1960 there were a dozen U.S States that made interracial marriages illegal. These States were: Arizona, Colorado, California, Idaho, Montana, Maryland, Indiana, North Dakota, Nevada, Nebraska, South Dakota, Oregon, Wyoming and Utah.
In 1967, the United Supreme Court, taking the case of Loving vs Virginia as a precedent, declared the decision to make unconstitutional all laws that banned interracial marriage.
Idk and Idc
u stupid its YO MAMA
jk its by arguing with the government
Every 10 years with the new U.S. Census, state legislatures set about drawing the boundaries of electoral districts in their states. The majority party in the legislature typically exerts its influence to draw districts that are favorable to itself. For instance, Republicans may observe that Democrats in their state are packed into a few urban pockets, and consequently, they will try to district them into as few groups as possible to give more representation to their Republican voters. Both major political parties are guilty of partisan gerrymandering, but the GOP spends far more money on the practice and often aims to disenfranchise minority voices.
The origin of the term "gerrymandering" is actually one of my favorite historical tidbits. Elbridge Gerry, then governor of Massachusetts, passed a law in 1812 that consolidated the Federalists into a handful of districts and gave disproportionate voice to the Democratic-Republicans. A political cartoon noted the districts' resemblance of a salamander (see picture below), and called it the "gerry-mander."
Many agree that partisan gerrymandering is a distasteful aspect of our democracy. This year, there have been a flurry of court rulings, including before the U.S. Supreme Court, examining the constitutionality of different voting maps that appear to be designed to disenfranchise minorities. The New York Times has done some excellent coverage that I highly recommend.
We made our houses out of poplar bark and mud put together with animal fur inside for extra warmth. #native answer from me a native Cherokee