Utah‚ Idaho‚ and Wyoming all share common borders and something else that matters more. According to data the Census Bureau gathered in 2020‚ these were three of the four states that had the highest percentages of households headed by married couples of the opposite sex. New Hampshire also ranked in the top four. In 2020‚ 57.8% of the households in Utah were headed by married couples of the opposite sex. In Idaho‚ it was 53.7%. However‚ these were the only states in the country where the percentage of households headed by opposite-sex married couples constituted a majority of all households. In New Hampshire‚ which ranked third‚ only 49.4% of households were headed by opposite-sex married couples. In Wyoming‚ which ranked fourth‚ it was 48.9%. Rounding out the top 10 states when ranked by this demographic were Kansas (48.5%); Nebraska (48.5%); Minnesota (48.4%); New Jersey (48.3%); Hawaii (48.2%); and Iowa (48.2%). Which states ranked at the bottom for the percentage of households headed by opposite-sex married couples? New York came in last. Only 40.6% of the households there were headed by opposite-sex married couples. Louisiana was next-to-last at 40.7%; and Rhode Island and New Mexico were tied for second-to-last at 41.3%. The rest of the bottom 10 included Mississippi (41.5%); Ohio (43.9%); Massachusetts (44.1%); Alabama (44.3%); and Georgia (44.7%). Although the District of Columbia—our nation’s capital—is not a state‚ the Census Bureau included it in its data table that presented the state-by-state percentages of households headed by opposite-sex married couples. Had it been a state‚ the District of Columbia would have finished in last place—by far. Only 22.8% of the households there were headed by opposite-sex married couples. In a majority of this nation’s states (31 out of 50)‚ the percentage of households headed by opposite-sex married couples was at least double the 22.8% the Census Bureau reported for the nation’s capital. “While married-couple households made up the greatest proportion of coupled households‚ their share has been in steady decline over the past several decades‚” the Census Bureau said in an analysis published last week. “From 1968 to 2018‚ the share of adults ages 25 to 34 living with a spouse decreased from 81.5 percent to 40.3 percent‚ while the share living with an unmarried partner increased from 0.2 percent to 14.8 percent.” In 2020‚ the Census Bureau expanded its data collection on American “couples.” “The U.S. Census Bureau revised the relationship to householder question in the 2020 Census to improve the quality of coupled-household data after discovering issues with the measurement of coupled households in the 2010 Census‚” the bureau said in a May 25‚ 2023‚ release. One revision included adding “specific answer categories for opposite-sex spouse; opposite-sex unmarried partner‚ same-sex spouse‚ same-sex unmarried partner.” So‚ which states in 2020 had the highest percentages of households headed by opposite-sex unmarried couples? Vermont led the nation with 9.0%. The top 10 also included Maine (8.9%); Oregon (8.2%); Alaska (8.1%); Nevada (8.1%); New Hampshire (8.1%); New Mexico (7.6%); Washington (7.6%); Wisconsin (7.6%); and Arizona and Rhode Island tied with 7.3%. Utah‚ which led the nation with 57.8% of its households headed by opposite-sex married couples‚ tied Alabama for the smallest percentage of households headed by opposite-sex unmarried couples (4.9%). Following Utah and Alabama at the bottom of this category were Mississippi (5.2%); South Carolina (5.5%); Georgia (5.6%); Virginia (5.7%); Texas (5.7%); New Jersey (5.8%); North Carolina (5.9%); Maryland (5.9%); and Arkansas (5.9%). There were two other categories where the Census Bureau data showed that the District of Columbia beat all the states. These were the percentages of households headed by married and unmarried same-sex couples. In our nation’s capital‚ according to the Census Bureau‚ 1.2% of the households were headed by unmarried same-sex couples‚ and 1.4% were headed by married same-sex couples. No state had even 1% in either of these categories. Fourteen states—including California‚ New York‚ and Massachusetts—led the other states with 0.5% of their households headed by unmarried same-sex couples. Four states—including Hawaii‚ Massachusetts‚ Delaware‚ and Vermont—led the other states with 0.8% of their households headed by married same-sex couples. The decline in the traditional family—headed by a married mother and father—is a decline for America. As this column has noted before‚ traditional family life correlates with financial well-being. In 2022‚ according to the Census Bureau‚ married-couple households had the highest median incomes and lowest poverty rate. The median household income for a married-couple family that year was $110‚800—compared to $51‚930 for a male householder living in a nonfamily household and $40‚200 for a female householder living in a nonfamily household. That same year‚ 6.9% of married-couple families with children under 18 lived in poverty‚ according to the Census Bureau‚ while 37.2% of female householders with children under 18 and no spouse present lived in poverty‚ and 18.3% of male householders with children under 18 and no spouse present lived in poverty. In 1798‚ President John Adams sent a message to a Massachusetts militia. “[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion‚” he said. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people‚” he said. “It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams was right. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.  The post It’s Time to Restore Fading Families appeared first on The Daily Signal.

KJP's April Fool's Day Joke Flops with White House Press Corps

Do You and Your Partner Need a 'Sleep Divorce?'

Have you ever wondered what your pets do when you’re not looking? Well‚ for one mischievous golden retriever named Zeppole‚ the answer involves a bit of harmless trespassing and a whole lot of fun. This delightful tale begins in the scenic coastal region of New Jersey‚ where Zeppole and his owner‚ known on TikTok as... The post Rule-breaking golden retriever hops the neighbors fence for a swim without invitation appeared first on Animal Channel.

Independent journalist Matt Taibbi has taken on deniers of government-private partnerships against free speech in a recent Twitter Files report. Taibbi issued the new report in response to NBC News smears accusing Taibbi‚ Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk of shutting down vital government “disinformation” efforts with a “conspiracy theory.” Despite NBC News’s claims‚ Taibbi provided alleged documentation which showed clear and defined partnerships between federal agencies and private entities to coordinate censorship with social media platforms. The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) were among those federal agencies. On March 27‚ Taibbi wrote in his Racket News piece‚ “Three separate investigations took over a year to nail down the case that government agencies were improperly censoring by proxy. Forced by courts to stop‚ they're desperately trying for a reboot.” His exposé comes soon after a CBS News’s 60 Minutes segment tried to argue that private entities did not collude with the government to censor speech. The segment included comments from government censorship proxy Kate Starbird. Taibbi posted screenshots on X to support his case. These included evidence of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP)‚ with which Starbird was involved‚ flagging content seemingly on behalf of the government for social media to censor. A message to DHS/CISA employee Brian Scully (the sender was unspecified) expressed regret “you won’t be joining us at Twitter.” This makes sense in light of earlier 2020 emails‚ one of which‚ from Twitter’s legal executive Stacia Cardille‚ declared “DHS want [sic] to establish a centralized portal for reporting disinformation.” Scully‚ who was cited as having ties to multiple federal agencies‚ was apparently a key player on the subject‚ which specifically aimed to undermine election-related information. The FBI was also implicated in many ways‚ per Taibbi‚ including through an email from agent Elvis Chan telling then-trust and safety head at Twitter Yoel Roth to set a date to share certain information. Roth promised‚ “We’ll discuss and get back to you.” In another message Taibbi shared‚ Roth voiced reservations about sharing information that he deemed more appropriate for a congressional investigation than an FBI request. Roth also protested the proposed DHS portal as “high-risk.” A congressional finding‚ Taibbi did not say from where‚ showed that DHS was involved with the portal behind the scenes. There was also an FBI letter to Twitter demanding information on metrics and how the platform “limit[ed] the scope of your analysis of the domestic‚ scam‚ foreign state‚ official propaganda‚ and white supremacist actors.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Wednesday’s CNN This Morning twice devolved into hysterical bewilderment among the three liberals on-set when conservative strategist and former Tim Scott 2024 adviser Matt Gorman responded to the left’s pearl clutching around fervent support for Donald Trump by reminding them of the cult of personality that surrounded Barack Obama. Host Kasie Hunt premised the discussion around a New York Times piece from reporter Michael Bender that claimed Trump supporters belong to the “Church of Trump” that views Trump as a deity and the repugnant smear of non-Democrat Christians by Tim Alberta in his finger-wagging book.     Gorman said he saw this whole take “a little bit different”‚ but Hunt tried to have him badmouth Republican voters by wondering what he made of “people view[ing] Trump as a seemingly — or treat him like a seemingly Christ-like figure when..the Bible specifically says‚ like‚ you’re not supposed to do that.” Gorman then dropped the truth bomb: “But I will say this though‚ in a — in a secular sort of way‚ not in an evangelical directly away‚ you saw Obama treated like this.” Having left a grimacing look of disgust from liberal Washington Post reporter Toluse Olorunnipa and liberal panelist Karen Finney mumbling in disagreement‚ Gorman further unspooled: [Y]es‚ absolutely. Absolutely. There was a sort of — people — not an — not an evangelical‚ religious way...But‚ look‚ I will say this‚ when you are president of your party and you’re a leader of your party‚ there is among — a base where it is a social — it is a secular deification in a way. It is. Yes. In contrast‚ Finney went the way Hunt wanted by repeatedly invoking Alberta’s book and arguing Trump’s “perverting the words of God” with his rhetoric in this campaign having turned “frightening” after‚ in 2016‚ merely running to appease “a cadre of voters who were afraid of a changing America...by demonizing...black and brown people and immigrants”. “Well‚ he has said in the past that has favorite Bible verse is an eye for an eye‚ which is firmly in the Old Testament‚ not the New‚” Hunt replied. The conversation then changed to a cockamamie narrative that‚ because there’s comparisons that have been made between Trump and Jesus‚ that Christian women will abandon Trump.  Thankfully‚ Gorman wasn’t having any of this and lambasted Finney for this absurdity that‚ after having been on the political scene for nearly a decade‚ a whole block of voters will abandon Trump (click “expand”): FINNEY: And you can see that they were — that — in the Iowa caucus we did see that that — the ad that we’ve played here before‚ that was likening the birth of Trump to the birth of Jesus — right — where he literally compared it — HUNT: Right. FINNEY: — there have been evangelicals who have said‚ Okay‚ that’s too far. And Tim Alberta‚ in his book‚ talks about how some in the evangelical movement have — had — are uncomfortable with this fusion and perversion of the teachings. HUNT: Matt‚ do you agree? GORMAN: No‚ because‚ look‚ like I — FINNEY: Of course not.  GORMAN: — look‚ I — no‚ no — FINNEY: You’re a Republican. Why would you agree with me? GORMAN: — of course not. But like — but I think the ad in the Republican primary‚ where there’s a trust among Republicans is a little different. When you get to a general election‚ that — that choice will fuse. I don’t think you’re going to see Biden evangelical votes in Iowa suddenly gaining steam here. Look‚ he’s not going to — FINNEY: Yes‚ but I think they could not vote for him. GORMAN: — he’s not going to lose — he’s not going to lose any votes off that. You know‚ I think it’s — that’s a winning issue for us? HUNT: You don’t think he’s going to lose any votes off that? GORMAN: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. That is a winning issue for him and press that advantage if you’re Trump. FINNEY: So you think suburban women — let’s go back to them — GORMAN: Yes. FINNEY: — are comfortable with Donald Trump comparing — GORMAN: Those — FINNEY: — no‚ no‚ no‚ let me finish —  GORMAN: Yes. FINNEY: — are comfortable with him — literally saying‚ I’m your god.  GORMAN: I want to meet those — FINNEY: I don’t think so. Please show me those voters. GORMAN: — those are suburban women who all of a sudden see that — that one thing‚ like‚ you know what‚ now I’m turned off. They — after almost a decade of this‚ that’s going to break it? FINNEY: No‚ it’s not just that. GORMAN: Yeah. FINNEY: What that shows is someone who will do anything to win‚ who has no boundaries‚ who has no sense of decency‚ who has no sense of what’s appropriate‚ what’s not appropriate. He will do anything to win. If it means comparing himself to God‚ that’s what he’ll do[.] (....) GORMAN: [W]e’ve been having the same conversation for a decade. Like‚ again‚ we talk about meanness. This is the same sort of thing that Hillary Clinton talked about. I just suddenly wonder that‚ you know‚ suddenly‚ in the year 2024‚ after Donald Trump’s been on the — for — this for a decade that people are going to wake up and be like‚ you know what? Now he’s too mean. You know what? I was going to vote for him‚ but‚ you know what? That one thing‚ no. This thing is big.  Hunt returned back to the cult of personality‚ granting it to Trump supporters because he’s “treated....totally different than other political candidates” but not for Obama because while “people got — were very excited about Obama‚ but — but it was secular and political”. Spoken like a former Obama Zombie herself‚ Finney concurred the support for Obama “was hopeful” and what that warm fuzziness “said about the country‚ that maybe we had moved to a [better] place” whereas Trump’s movement has been “about grievance and retribution”. Hunt called this “definitely objectively true” as “hope and change is not the same as” a movement of “grievance.” Gorman closed with what should be a basic observation of history and politics that “popular presidents...always have a certain cult of personality around them” (and especially in their own parties)‚ so no one should “act like this suddenly” is new with Trump voters. Hunt had said Gorman would have the last word‚ but she took that back to defend Obama’s honor: “Yeah‚ but the shoot — you know‚ his — I could shoot people on Fifth Avenue and my base would still be with me. There is something about him that is different from Reagan and Obama.” To see the relevant CNN transcript from April 3‚ click here.

These Old Fashioned Oatmeal Bars are easy to make and a wonderful treat! You will also want to try these delicious Peanut Butter Oatmeal Cookies‚ they are no bake and everyone loves them. ❤️WHY WE LOVE THIS RECIPE This recipe is easy to make and a great treat! If you love oatmeal this is a...

A major hospital network in Massachusetts has now revamped its policies regarding babies born addicted to drugs in an attempt to address "significant racial and ethnic inequities" it claims are associated with substance abuse disorder.On Tuesday‚ Mass General Brigham‚ the commonwealth's largest hospital group‚ announced that it will no longer automatically report that an infant has been born with drug addiction since the automatic reporting and other such policies "disproportionately affect Black individuals."Current commonwealth law demands mandatory reporting of all infants with "physical dependence upon an addictive drug at birth." However‚ the hospitals affiliated with Mass General Brigham — including Massachusetts General Hospital‚ Brigham and Women’s Hospital‚ Newton-Wellesley Hospital‚ and Salem Hospital — will now encourage reporting such cases to child protective services only if the babies are "suffering or at imminent risk of suffering physical or emotional injury."Another policy change at Mass General Brigham means that medical professionals will now conduct toxicology tests on newborns and/or "pregnant people" — sometimes referred to as women — only under two conditions. First‚ hospital workers must be given written consent to perform the tests. Second‚ they will perform the tests only if the results will affect the medical treatment the mother and/or child receives.These new policies are part of Mass General Brigham's larger "United Against Racism effort" to fix policies that "may unwittingly perpetuate structural racism.""Our new perinatal testing and reporting policy is the latest step in our efforts to address longstanding inequities in substance use disorder care and to provide compassionate‚ evidence-based support to families‚ while addressing substance use disorder as a treatable health condition‚" said Sarah Wakeman‚ M.D.‚ senior medical director for Substance Use Disorder at Mass General Brigham.Wakeman claimed that some women may stop seeking treatment for addiction if they believe they may lose custody of their children after birth. She also claimed that substance abuse alone does not mean that pregnant women will abuse or neglect their children after they're born.Mass General Brigham is not the only medical organization that wants fewer babies born addicted to drugs to be taken away from drug-addicted mothers. It is following in the footsteps of Boston Medical Center as well as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Society of Addiction Medicine‚ which have all taken a similar approach regarding drug-addicted babies."This policy reflects an emerging consensus‚ based on sound science‚ that is being embraced by our peer institutions and was developed in coordination with a wide range of partners‚" Wakeman asserted.Allison Bryant‚ M.D.‚ MPH‚ associate chief health equity officer at Mass General Brigham‚ claimed that this new policy will help those in the medical industry "turn our lens inward to understand our own contributions to stigma and inequity and strive to fix them."Wakeman agreed. "It takes a multi-pronged approach to eliminate racial inequities and drop barriers to treatment‚" she said.H/T: Libs of TikTokLike Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Scotland is not a promising place to live if you value free speech. The country just passed the Hate Crime and Public Order Act‚ which makes it a criminal offense to stir up hatred with threatening or abusive behavior on the basis of characteristics including age‚ disability‚ religion‚ sexual orientation‚ and transgender identity. One famous author took it upon herself to test the new act‚ daring the Scottish government to arrest her for violating its new laws against “hate speech.” “The new legislation is wide open to abuse by activists who wish to silence those of us speaking out about the dangers of eliminating women’s and girl’s single sex spaces‚ the grotesque unfairness of allowing males to compete in female sports‚ and the reality and immutability of biological sex‚” J.K. Rowling tweeted on X. She ended her tweet with a challenge. “If what I’ve written here qualifies as an offense under the terms of the new act‚ I look forward to being arrested when I return to the birthplace of the Scottish Enlightenment‚” she wrote. Her tweets have been declared as not criminal by the Scottish police‚ so she has promised to keep a lookout for other non-famous individuals being punished for the same expression of free speech. Glenn Beck is impressed. “What J.K. Rowling is experiencing is a window into what they’re trying to do here‚ but she’s not backing down‚” Glenn says‚ before quoting a line from one of her "Harry Potter" novels that he believes should be applied here. “Have you any idea how much tyrants fear the people they oppress? All of them realize that one day‚ amongst their many victims‚ there is sure to be one who rises against them and strikes back.” Want more from Glenn Beck?To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling‚ thought-provoking analysis‚ and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii said in a statement that presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. asked if she would serve as his running mate‚ but she declined‚ ABC News reported."I met with Kennedy several times‚ and we have become good friends‚" Gabbard noted in a statement‚ according to the outlet. "He asked if I would be his running mate. After careful consideration‚ I respectfully declined."ABC News reported that an individual close to Kennedy indicated‚ "There were definitely meetings‚ but it didn't work out." "We talked to a bunch of people‚" the individual noted‚ according to the outlet. "Tulsi's a rock star no matter what."Last week‚ Kennedy announced Nicole Shanahan as his running mate. Kennedy launched a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination last year but later switched to an independent White House bid.Gabbard‚ who served as a Democratic House lawmaker from early 2013 until early 2021‚ ran in the Democratic presidential primary during the last election cycle but ultimately dropped out and supported Joe Biden.In 2022‚ Gabbard announced that she was leaving the Democratic Party. "I'm calling on my fellow common sense‚ independent-minded Democrats to join me in leaving the Democratic Party‚" she said in a video. She asserted that the party is controlled by "an elitist cabal of warmongers who are driven by cowardly wokeness." Her book "For Love of Country: Leave the Democrat Party Behind" is slated to be released at the end of April. — (@) Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!