instruction:
Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.
question:
"U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson is continuing his pointed attacks against Republican opponent Daniel Webster, and Webster's stance on women's issues. Only this time, he's ditching the lines about religious fanaticism and the comparisons to the Taliban. Grayson, a Democrat from Orlando, caught flak for airing an ad that compared Webster's beliefs to those of the Taliban, and for distorting Webster's words in a speech Webster gave to a Christian group. Grayson played clips in a 30-second ad called ""Taliban Dan Webster"" that showed Webster saying wives should submit to their husbands. But an unedited clip of the speech showed that Webster was in fact telling husbands to love their wives. The distortion, which earned a False rating from PolitiFact Florida, gave Webster's campaign national attention (including tweets of support from Sarah Palin) and helped him raise more than $100,000 in 48 hours, his campaign said. In response, Grayson released a toned-down version of the ""Taliban Dan"" ad on Oct. 6, 2010, called ""The Facts."" Gone are the terrorists holding machine guns, the people burning American flags and the women wearing burqas. Also gone are references to religious fanaticism, Iran and the Bible. (Gone, too, we found, is the ""Taliban Dan Webster"" ad from Grayson's YouTube website. The video is now marked private.) Here's a transcript of the new ad: Daniel Webster's Washington backers are attacking Alan Grayson on women's issues. The facts on Webster's record:  Fact: Webster sponsored a bill to create a form of marriage that would trap women in abusive relationships. Fact: Webster is an advocate for a group that teaches that mothers should not work outside the home. Fact: Webster would force victims of rape and incest to bear their attacker's child. Those are the facts. Don't let Daniel Webster make the laws we will have to live with. In another item, we're analyzing the claim that Webster is an advocate for a group that teaches that mothers should not work outside the home. In this fact check, we'll focus on the first ""Fact"" -- that Webster sponsored a bill to create a form of marriage that would trap women in abusive relationships. It's a slightly different take on a claim in the first ad when Grayson claimed that Webster ""wants to make divorce illegal,"" even for abused women. Both claims track back to a piece of legislation Webster introduced as a member of the state House in 1990. That year, Webster authored HB 1585, a bill that ""creates a form of marriage known as 'covenant marriage,' which may be dissolved only on grounds of adultery."" Florida law then and now allows married couples to divorce if a court finds that the marriage is ""irretrievably broken."" It's a common standard throughout the country, often called no-fault divorce. The term can be interpreted broadly and critics say the standard of proof makes divorce too easy. Webster's legislation sought to make getting a divorce more difficult, at least for couples that voluntarily entered the covenant marriage. Here's what he proposed. Men and women would have the option on their application for a marriage license to elect a covenant marriage. Under terms of the covenant marriage agreement, the husband- and wife-to-be would have to have their parents' permission and attend premarital counseling by a member of the clergy or a marriage counselor before proceeding. As part of their marriage license, the husband and wife would then have to sign notarized documents declaring:  ""I, (insert name), do hereby declare my intent to enter in Covenant Marriage. I do so with the full understanding that a Covenant Marriage may not be dissolved except by reason of adultery. I have attended premarital counseling in good faith and understand my responsibilities to the marriage. I promise to seek counsel in times of trouble. I believe that I have chosen my life-mate wisely and have disclosed to him or her all facts that may adversely affect his or her decision to enter in this covenant with me."" Once a couple agreed to a covenant marriage, the only way they could get a divorce is for adultery. That means physical or sexual abuse was not grounds for a divorce. Webster's legislation went nowhere in Florida -- Democrats controlled the state House in 1990, and the bill never came up for a vote -- but it did help launch the movement for covenant marriage nationwide. Three states -- Louisiana, Arkansas and Arizona -- adopted a version of Webster's law, though the laws on the books in those states were all less restrictive than what Webster proposed in Florida, said Alan J. Hawkins, a professor of Family Life at Brigham Young University and an expert on covenant marriage. In his first ad, ""Taliban Dan Webster,"" Grayson said that Webster ""wants to make divorce illegal,"" even for abused women. But as our research proves, Webster's bill wouldn't make all divorce illegal. Rather it would make divorce more difficult, but not impossible, for couples who chose to form a covenant marriage. Even couples who chose Webster's form of covenant marriage had a small window out for adultery. It appears the Grayson campaign listened. In his new ad, ""The Facts,"" Grayson says ""Webster sponsored a bill to create a form of marriage that would trap women in abusive relationships."" In 1990, Webster sponsored HB 1585, which would create a new form of marriage called covenant marriage. If women agreed to form a covenant marriage, they would not be allowed to divorce because of physical or sexual abuse. The only out under Webster's legislation was adultery."
answer:
Webster sponsored a bill to create a form of marriage that would trap women in abusive relationships.


question:
Trump even suggested Thursday that the release could have been intentional. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the clearinghouse for the web of U.S. spy agencies, said it had ruled out the virus being man-made but was still investigating the precise source of the global pandemic, which has killed more than 220,000 people worldwide. Though scientists suggest the likeliest origin of the pandemic remains natural, that it spread from an infected animal to a human, Trump claimed to have seen evidence to support the theory that the origin was an infectious disease lab in Wuhan, the epicenter of the Chinese outbreak. He said the U.S. now “is finding how it came out.” “It’s a terrible thing that happened,” the president said. “Whether they made a mistake or whether it started off as a mistake and then they made another one, or did somebody do something on purpose.” The intel statement said the federal agencies concur “with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified.” “The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.” In recent days the Trump administration has sharpened its rhetoric on China, accusing the geopolitical foe and vital trading partner of failing to act swiftly enough to sound the alarm about the outbreak or to stop the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19. U.S. officials have said the Chinese government should “pay a price” for its handling of the pandemic. This all comes as the pace of Trump’s own original response continues to come under scrutiny, questioned as too meager and too slow. Earlier Thursday, before Trump’s comments, the Chinese government said that any claims that the coronavirus was released from a laboratory are “unfounded and purely fabricated out of nothing.” Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang cited the institute’s director, Yuan Zhiming, as saying the lab strictly implements bio-security procedures that would prevent the release of any pathogen. “I would like to point out again that the origin of the virus is a complex scientific issue, and it should be studied by scientists and professionals,” Geng said. He also criticized those in the U.S. who say China should be held accountable for the global pandemic, saying they should spend their time on “better controlling the epidemic situation at home.” At the White House, Trump repeatedly blamed China for its handling of the outbreak, criticizing the country for restricting domestic travel to slow the virus but not international travel to keep it from spreading abroad. “Certainly it could have been stopped,” Trump said during an event in the East Room on his administration’s efforts to aid seniors during the outbreak. “They either couldn’t do it from a competence standpoint, or they let it spread.” “It got loose, let’s say, and they could have capped it.” Earlier this month, Trump addressed the lab theory saying, “More and more, we’re hearing the story.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo added at the time, “The mere fact that we don’t know the answers — that China hasn’t shared the answers — I think is very, very telling.” Pompeo also pressed China to let outside experts into the lab “so that we can determine precisely where this virus began.” While Trump and Pompeo have made their feelings clear, a U.S. intelligence official disputed the notion that there was pressure on agencies to bolster a particular theory. The intelligence official was not authorized to publicly discuss the issue and spoke only on condition of anonymity. Scientists say the virus arose naturally in bats. Even so, Pompeo and others have pointed fingers at an institute that is run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. It has done groundbreaking research tracing the likely origins of the SARS virus, finding new bat viruses and discovering how they could jump to people. “We know that there is the Wuhan Institute of Virology just a handful of miles away from where the wet market was,” Pompeo said two weeks ago. The institute has an address 8 miles, or 13 kilometers, from the market that is considered a possible source. U.S. officials say the American Embassy in Beijing flagged concerns about potential safety issues at the lab in Wuhan in 2018, but they have yet to find any evidence the virus originated there nearly two years later. Scientists studying the virus for months have made clear they believe it wasn’t man-made but are still working to determine a point at which it may have jumped from animals to humans. Early attention focused on the live-animal market in Wuhan where the first cases were reported in December. But the first person identified with the disease had no known connection to that market. Kristian Andersen, who studies the virus at Scripps Research in La Jolla, California, puts the odds of it being accidentally released by the Wuhan lab at “a million to one,” far less likely than an infection in nature. But virus expert David O’Connor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison said he thinks too little is known to rule out any source, except the idea the virus was man-made. Finding the source is important, he said, because it may harbor the next pandemic virus. The U.S. was providing funding to the Wuhan lab for its research on coronaviruses, Michael Morell, former acting director and deputy director of the CIA, said Thursday. He said State Department cables indicate that there have been concerns in past years among U.S. officials about the safety protocols at that lab. If the virus did escape from a Chinese lab, it not only reflects negatively on China but also on the United States for providing research funding to a lab that has safety concerns, Morell said during an online forum hosted by the Michael V. Hayden Center for Intelligence, Policy and International Security at George Mason University. “So if it did escape, we’re all in this together,” Morell said. “This is not a gotcha for China. This is a gotcha for both of us.” ___ Associated Press writers Deb Riechmann in Washington and Malcolm Ritter in New York contributed to this report.
answer:
Trump speculates that China released virus in lab ‘mistake’.


question:
Aldrin said he didn’t attend because of objections over the foundation’s current aims and ongoing legal matters associated with the foundation. The former astronaut is locked in a legal battle with family members who say he is suffering from mental decline. The black-tie Apollo Celebration Gala was held Saturday under a Saturn V rocket at the Kennedy Space Center, featured a panel discussion by astronauts, an awards ceremony, and an auction of space memorabilia. Hundreds of people attended the sold-out event, including British physicist Brian Cox, who presented Virgin Galactic founder Richard Branson with the ShareSpace Foundation’s Innovation award. Branson, whose company is developing a new generation of commercial spacecraft, said in a recorded video that the Apollo missions influenced his generation. “Space is still hard, really hard. It still really matters,” Branson said. “There would be no Virgin Galactic, no Virgin Orbit and no spaceship company had it not been for Apollo astronauts and the thousands of talented people who made their mission possible.” Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins took part in the historic Apollo 11 mission, landing the first two humans on the moon on July 20, 1969. Armstrong was first to walk on the moon, joined soon after by Aldrin while Collins remained in orbit aboard the command module. Dr. Carolyn Williams of the nonprofit From One Hand To AnOTHER received the foundation’s Education award, and former Johnson Space Center director Gerry Griffin, a flight director for all of the crewed Apollo missions, was honored with the Pioneer award. “It’s very humbling, it kind of came out of the blue,” Griffin said. “It is so neat to know that we’ve passed the torch that will let this next generation take us to this next step.” That next step, Griffin said, is a return of Americans to the Moon and, eventually, Mars — something former Apollo astronauts Walt Cunningham, Harrison Schmitt, Rusty Schweickart and Tom Stafford discussed during a conversation with Cox. “We’re sort of going through a second door here. The door isn’t all the way open — we haven’t gone all the way through it — but it’s cracked open,” Schweickart, who flew as the lunar module pilot on Apollo 9, told The Associated Press. “Space is going to be much less expensive to go to, and that’s going to open up not just opportunities for people to fly, but because of the decreased cost, real opportunities for innovators to generate new ideas and to do things that have never been done before.” Aldrin’s ShareSpace Foundation is one of the sponsors of the annual gala, which raises money for Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts and Mathematics — or STEAM education — and Astronaut Scholarship Foundation scholarships. Renowned Brazilian pop artist Romero Britto donated artwork from his “Buzz Aldrin Space Series” for the auction, which also included a behind-the-scenes tour of Virgin Galactic in California and autographed space memorabilia. Tickets for the event ranged from $750 to $2,500 per person. Aldrin sued two of his adult children and a former business manager last month, accusing them of misusing his credit cards, transferring money from an account and slandering him by saying he has dementia. Weeks before that, Andrew and Jan Aldrin filed a petition claiming their 88-year-old father was suffering from memory loss, delusions, paranoia and confusion. Andrew and Jan Aldrin and business manager Christina Korp are on the foundation’s board and attended the gala. Aldrin’s oldest son, James, isn’t involved in the legal fight. Buzz Aldrin said in a statement that he didn’t attend “due to the present course of events related to my space initiatives, also current legal matters linked to the ShareSpace Foundation.” “I formed ShareSpace Foundation in 1998 for the promotion of individual space voyagers,” Aldrin added. “The Foundation is, in my view, now being used to promote quite different objectives.” Andrew Aldrin acknowledged his father’s absence during the gala. “We’re sorry dad can’t be here, I know some of you are disappointed,” Aldrin said. “Ultimately, what we’re about is creating the first generation of Martians.” ___ Follow Alex Sanz at https://twitter.com/AlexSanz and Mike Schneider at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP
answer:

Gala opens countdown to 50th anniversary of 1st moon landing.