题目内容
Zaineb and Faizal Zekeria don’t look like the living evidence of a potentially nation-altering trend. They look like two newlyweds in love. But their year-old union is hand-holding proof of how a massive influx of immigrants is changing who marries whom, and why, and challenging the idealized notion of America as a multicultural melting pot. Increasingly, a new study shows, U. S. -born Asians and Hispanics are choosing to wed foreign-born members of their own ethnicity. At the same time, greater numbers of new immigrants are marrying among themselves. Some sociologists believe the shift could have significant implications: It could signal a widening gap between the races. Or, in another view, it could reflect growing pride among minority peoples. There’s no question what has fueled the trend. The 11 million immigrants who arrived in the 1990s dramatically increased the same- ethnicity pool of potential mates. Hispanics are the country’s fastest- growing minority group, Asians the second-fastest. The rationales for choosing a husband or wife of the same background, say couples interviewed for this story, are practical and emotional. Having a foreign-born mate offers an American a deeper connection to his or her ancestry. The opposite also occurs, with American partners helping to ease their spouses’ transition to a new world. The former Zaineb Ainuddin, 29, and Faizal Zekeria, 30, found both to be true. She was born in Chicago, he in Bombay, India. The Philadelphia couple met in 1997 as undergraduates at Temple University. "I’d consider myself brought up in an American household," said Zaineb, whose father arrived in the States in 1965, when he was 37. "I was the unusual one who broke away and married an Indian." The number of interracial marriages in the United States has been growing since the 1970s. Now two researchers, Zhenchao Qian, a sociologist at Ohio State University, and Daniel Lichter, a policy analyst at Cornell University, have documented an important change. Using census data from 1990 and 2000, Qian and Lichter identified "unprecedented declines in intermarriage with whites, and big increases in marriages between native-and foreign-born members of Asian and Hispanic ethnicities." Their study findings were recently published in the American Sociological Review. In 10 years, the percentage of Hispanics who married outside their ethnicity fell to 19.9 from 26.9. The decline among Asians was even greater, 33.2 percent compared with 41.7 percent. Meanwhile, among marriages between people of the same ethnicity, pairings between native-and foreign-born rose 50 percent for Asians and 9 percent for Hispanics. Scholars wonder how the trend could affect race relations. For decades, Lichter and Qian note, people have tended to view rising rates of intermarriage as a sign of growing acceptance between peoples of different color and culture. Others say the decline in intermarriage is a non-issue. "Most people prefer to marry someone with whom they have a lot in common--heritage, culture, values, customs, habits, language and appearance," said B. J. Gallagher, an L. A. sociologist who specializes in diversity issues. "It’s... a natural thing. " Marc Lamont Hill, who teaches urban education at Temple University, sees the increase in same-culture marriages as "absolutely a good thing." "We’ve been taught that white people, and particularly white women, are the standard for beauty and attractiveness," Hill said. Marrying within ethnicity is a way of moving beyond that, he said. According to the passage, which of the following is TRUE
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
现有如下程序： Private Sub Command1_Click() s=0 For i=1 To 5 s=s+f(5+i) Next Print s End Sub Public Function f(x As Integer) If x＞=10 Then t=x+1 Else t=x+2 End If f=t End Function 运行程序，则窗体上显示的是( )。
The American idea of respecting human rights came from several sources. First, the colonists had been (36) . of their rights in the Old World. They realized that people’s rights must be (37) . Moreover, the Bible and literature from Greece and Rome taught that people are born with basic rights. As a result, the U. S. Constitution included 10 (38) to guarantee citizens’ basic rights. This “Bill of Rights” promised freedom of religion, freedom of speech and of the press, the right to bear arms and the right to a (39) trial.Throughout American history, the belief in (40) human rights has influenced government policies and laws. Slavery (41) argued that even slaves had rights as human beings. Finally, after the Civil War, slavery was (42) . As industries developed, many people protested the poor working conditions. Eventually, laws were passed (43) workers fair wages and working hours and prohibiting child labor. The Civil Rights Movement used human rights arguments in the fight against discrimination.Human rights have become a global concern. (44) . Three years later, the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (45) . Later, groups like Amnesty International were formed to keep an eye out for human rights abuses wherever they occur.Most nations in the world today would agree that human beings have basic rights. Of course, different countries have different perspectives about the issue. (46) .
Milton Friedman was wrong. Inflation is always and everywhere a social phenomenon, not a monetary one. At least, that is how Robert Samuelson sees it. The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath dwells little on the economics of inflation; the main text does not mention the Federal Reserve until page 31. Instead, it examines the intellectual and political currents that let inflation rise from 1% in the early 1960s to nearly 15% in 1980 and then brought it down again. This is a laudable(值得称赞的) enterprise. Historians have devoted lots of scholarship to the Vietnam War and the civil-rights movement but almost nothing to the parallel rise in inflation, whose impact on society has been arguably great. Mr. Samuelson, an economics columnist for the Washington Post and Newsweek, graphically recounts the futile efforts of various presidents to contain inflation, and the toll they exacted. Inflation began, Mr. Samuelson writes, because the followers of John Maynard Keynes who dominated economics after the Second World War convinced John Kennedy that reducing unemployment would cause only a small rise in inflation. But as inflation increased, it became politically impossible to bring it down. In 1968 Richard Nixon asked Herbert Stein, a nominee for Iris Council of Economic Advisers, what the president-elect’s biggest economic challenge would be. When Stein replied inflation, Nixon "immediately warned me that we must not raise unemployment," Stein later wrote. The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath is readable, but often frustrating. Rather than proceeding chronologically, it hopscotches (像玩“跳房子”游戏) back and forth between decades, repeatedly bringing home the points it wants to make. Despite the forward-looking subtitle, Mr. Samuelson does not demonstrate that the great inflation has much bearing on America’s future. He spends much of two chapters, 73 pages in all, choosing a list of contemporary economic problems, from excessive entitlement spending to global imbalances that have little to do with inflation. Meanwhile, he devotes just a few paragraphs to inflation’s most crucial impact at the present. The decline in interest rates that followed inflation’s defeat created bubbles in stocks and houses and fuelled a" reach for yield" whose undoing is at the heart of the current crisis. More puzzling is the fact that, in a year in which inflation and deflation have both repeatedly hit the headlines, Mr. Samuelson devotes little time to speculating on the future course of inflation and the political pressures that will affect it. That is a pity because it is a ripe subject. What does "politically impossible to bring it down" (Para. 3) really mean
Away from their profession, _____________________ (科学家并不天生就比其他人更讲道德).
微信支付 
支付宝支付