The World and Everything in It: December 30, 2025

Editor's note: The following text is a transcript of a podcast story. To listen to the story, click on the arrow beneath the headline above.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is the penultimate day of WORLD’s December Giving Drive. So many have given gifts so far, and we are so grateful, but not everyone has.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: If you’re in the “not-everyone” camp, I guess I’m talking to you. There’s just today and tomorrow to send in your support.

EICHER: If you depend on The WORLD and Everything in It for serious reporting, for careful analysis, and for journalism of Christian conviction, if you depend on us, that’s great, because, well, we depend on you, too.

REICHARD: So don’t let the deadline get behind you. Please visit W-N-G-dot-O-R-G-slash-donate, and won’t you do it right now?

EICHER: That’s wng.org/donate

REICHARD: Good morning!

Over the weekend, Russia launched one of its largest drone attacks of the year on Ukraine’s capital. A WORLD reporter was there. We’ll talk with him.

EICHER: Also today, WORLD’s Steve West looks back at the biggest religious liberty cases in 2025.

Later, the legacy of one of the greatest jockeys in thoroughbred racing, and the rare bond between rider and racehorse.

LUSKY: I don’t know that any other jockey might have figured that out with Secretariat in time. They got each other.

And WORLD commentator James Woods on the illiberalism of Canadian lawmakers.

REICHARD: It’s Tuesday, December 30th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

REICHARD: Up next, Kent Covington with today’s news.

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Trump-Netanyahu » President Trump hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Trump’s Florida estate on Monday.

The meeting came as the White House presses to move Israel’s peace deal with Hamas into its second, more complicated, phase. That would involve Hamas disarming and handing over power to a provisional government.

And Trump told reporters:

TRUMP:  If they don't disarm as, as they agreed to do, they agreed to it, and then they'll be held to pay for them.

Hamas maintains it never agreed to disarm.

Israeli UN Ambassador to the UN Danny Dannon also emphasized that the removal of Hamas is essential for moving forward.

DANNON:  We are willing to cooperate, but I think the understanding that Hamas must not be part of the equation, uh, it's essential. And, uh, pre President Trump mentioned it before the meeting.

Trump and Netanyahu had high praise for one another.

Trump described the prime minister as a great wartime leader, that has taken on an existential threat to Israel. And Netanyahu called the president the best friend his country has ever had.

NETANYAHU:  I think he's been extraordinary in his friendship and his support for Israel, his principled positions, his willingness to just cut through to get to the essence of things. And I don't say that as a compliment, I just mean it.

He also announced that his government will award Trump the Israel Prize, in recognition of his efforts to bring peace to the Middle East. That would make Trump the first non-Israeli ever to receive the award.

Trump says U.S. hit drug boat facility » Trump also told reporters Monday the United States struck a dock facility in Venezuela where US authorities say drugs boats are loaded.

TRUMP:  There was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats up with drugs. They load the boats up with drugs. So we hit all the boats and now we hit the area. It's the, uh, implementation area. That's where they implement, and that is, uh, no longer around.

REPORTER: Is that the only strike that the US had done inside…?  

TRUMP: I don't want to comment.

That could mark the first land-based action in the US campaign against drug trafficking out of Venezuela.

So far this year, the United States has carried out dozens of strikes on suspected drug-trafficking vessels, reportedly resulting in more than 100 deaths. The administration says all of those killed were members of cartels now designated as foreign terrorist organizations.

Trump declined to say whether the U.S. military or the CIA carried out the “dock area” strike, or confirm the exact location.

Ukraine latest » Ukraine’s president says the United States is offering 15 years of security guarantees as part of a proposed peace plan with Russia. WORLD’s Kristen Flavin reports:

KRISTEN FLAVIN: Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Monday he wants a much longer commitment—closer to 50 years to prevent future Russian attacks.

The comments came a day after Zelenskyy met with President Trump at Trump’s Florida resort.

Trump said the two sides are closer than ever to a deal, but warned talks could still fall apart.

Major issues remain unresolved, including troop withdrawals and control of the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

Zelenskyy said security guarantees are essential, calling them the only way the war can realistically end.

Trump also spoke by phone with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, calling it a “very good” conversation, while acknowledging several difficult issues remain.

For WORLD, I’m Kristen Flavin.

Winter storm » A fast-strengthening bomb cyclone slammed the Midwest, bringing blizzard conditions, dangerous travel, and widespread power outages — before turning its attention east.

Cody Snell with the National Weather Service said Monday:

SNELL: The warm lake waters, uh, clashing with the cold air moving over top will produce heavy lake effects, snow across portions of the Great Lakes, including downwind of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, specifically into portions of New York State, uh, and just south of the Buffalo Metro area.

Heavy snow and strong winds have shut down roads across parts of Iowa, Minnesota, and Michigan.

More than 200 miles of Interstate 35 closed in Iowa, where state troopers reported dozens of crashes, including one fatal wreck.

Wind chills dropped as low as 30 below zero in the northern Plains.

Minnesota fraud » FBI Director Kash Patel says federal authorities are investigating fraud accusations in Minnesota. In fact, he says investigations have been going on for months, and that numerous Somali suspects have been charged.

Patel’s update came days after an independent journalist went viral for uncovering even more state funding being given to phoney daycares and learning centers.

Minnesota State Representative Harry Niska:

NISKA: These are all sites that have been flagged by the fraud committee for DHS previously, but they continue to operate and receive millions in taxpayer dollars. Some may be legitimate, but based on our work and the efforts of citizen journalists, it appears that many may be entirely fraudulent.

Patel said the FBI uncovered $250 million in COVID relief fraud among Minnesota Somalis, which he described as only the tip of the iceberg.

I'm Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: a first-hand report from Kyiv on last Saturday’s drone attack. Plus, the life of a short athlete who cast a long shadow.

This is The World and Everything in It.

NICK EICHER, HOST: It’s Tuesday the 30th of December.

This is WORLD Radio and we’re glad to have you along today. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard.

SOUND: [SHAHID DRONES]

In the weeks leading up to Christmas, things had gotten relatively quiet in Kyiv. But many were holding their breath…waiting for a Christmas attack by Russia. Early Saturday morning, Telegram channels lit up with warnings as more than four hundred drones and missiles were on their way.

EICHER: WORLD’s Caleb Welde spent Christmas in Kyiv and he recorded the sound of these shahid drones from his hotel room. Caleb is here now to talk to us about what it was like, good morning Caleb.

CALEB WELDE: Good morning.

REICHARD: Tell us a little about the lead up to this latest attack. It wasn’t really a surprise was it?

WELDE: No, it wasn't. A number of people in Kyiv said, “don't be fooled. It's been too quiet lately. Russia is stockpiling to overwhelm the air defense systems in Kyiv.”

EICHER: Caleb, take a moment and describe for us the beginning of the Saturday morning attack. Surprise or not…

WELDE: So we got word on Telegram channels late Friday night that something was coming. And by early, about 12:30am in the morning, Saturday morning—and I'll just read this message on a telegram channel—and it says, “considering the number of ships at sea and bombers in the air, as well as ballistics and Daggers, that would be Dagger missiles, today could be the most massive shelling this year.” So that was before any explosion. Then around 1:30 I counted 15 or 20 explosions, shook the building, shook the windows. Then it was quiet. For about an hour, I fell back asleep, and then around three in the morning, I woke up again, and could see on the Telegram channels, there was a radar image of a string of drones stretching from Kyiv almost to the Black Sea. At one point that morning, they said, you know, be ready. We think 80 drones will arrive in the city in the next 20 minutes. You know, opening the window, I could hear, hear them approaching, hear them leaving, and then, and then the anti-aircraft fire trying to shoot them down—more or less for hours and hours—there were explosions every 30 seconds or so. You know, varying distances for me over the city.

EICHER: And how did the people around you react?

WELDE: I'm in a pretty small hotel. I don't know how many people are staying here, but when I went downstairs, there's no underground where I'm at, but in the eating area, there was one couple that had kind of laid down in the booth and looked like they had decided to camp out there for the night. A few hours later, I was sitting in a hallway watching the videos come in of the attacks throughout the city, and I could hear a woman in the room across me crying. And I don't know what was going on—if she was watching the same videos I was—but it was, it was video after video of drones flying into apartment buildings and based on the lighting of the videos, I could tell they were just, you know, five or 10 minutes ago,

REICHARD: I’m curious. This war has been going on for years now. Would you say that this kind of thing has become almost routine, so life just goes on?

WELDE: Yeah, I'm sorry to say that it does seem like it's routine here. Everyone has alerts on their phone when there's an air raid going on, but that can be, you know, a ballistic missile has been launched that could hit a large area. And so people really do seem to check the telegram channels, but, I mean, even during the attack, I remember looking out the window and there was a man taking his trash out to the dumpster. You know, I think there's really a range. A woman in a nearby coffee shop told me she sleeps in the bathroom on nights like that. But then a woman in a town 70 miles from the front line said 90% of people there just kind of ignore the alarms.

EICHER: Well, it's been a few days since the weekend attack. What's the mood in Kyiv right now?

WELDE: The mood in Kyiv is about like before the attacks. Some people at an English learning club I'm a part of here were saying, you know, “what's to celebrate?” They were not believers. But then on the other hand, just riding the metro through the city, you know, you see people carrying gifts and just continuing life. And there was, there was even a video, actually, again, while the attack was still going on, you know, at this point, there were only six drones over the city. A picture went out in the Telegram channels of a woman cleaning her windows. Holding herself to the side of the building and just cleaning her windows. And the caption said, for some in Kyiv, anxiety, for some, washing the windows. “We will not be broken.”

EICHER: How are people you're talking with looking at the potential peace process?

WELDE: Well, there's been a range of things that I've heard. They're not optimistic about it. First of all, as much as Trump and Zelenskyy and Europe talk, it doesn't seem like Russia is really making concessions. And everyone I've talked to has said that, you know, they believe, if Ukraine does give up the territory that Russia has taken, that it will not bring peace. That it will at best, pause the war for a few years and give Russia time to regroup. I've been surprised to hear basically everyone I've talked to has said that they really believe Russia is an existential threat to the country. And not only 100 percent wants to take over all of Ukraine, but probably more of Europe as well.

REICHARD: Caleb Welde is a freelance reporter for WORLD. Caleb, thanks for joining us and stay safe.

WELDE: Thank you. It's good to be with you.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Moving now from the streets of Kyiv to U-S efforts to broker peace. Just hours after the latest barrage in Ukraine’s capital, President Zelenskyy was in Florida, meeting face to face with President Trump.

TRUMP: Got to make a deal, gotta get it done. Too many people dying. And, ah, I think most presidents want to make a deal.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: The Ukrainian president suggested that they are closer to nailing down a deal than ever before.

ZELENSKYY: Peace plan is very important. We have to discuss… and sequencing very important. Our teams talked about strategy, how to do make step by step and to bring this closer. And we will discuss this strategy.

EICHER: Joining us now to talk about these latest developments is John Hardie, Deputy Russia Program Director for Foundation for Defense of Democracies. John, good morning.

JOHN HARDIE: Good morning, thanks for having me on.

REICHARD: We’re so glad you’re here. Zelenskyy met with Trump on Sunday, was the weekend meeting already scheduled or in response to the attack?

HARDIE: This meeting was planned. It's in response to weeks of shuttle diplomacy between Ukrainian, American, and European officials trying to nail down details of a 20-point plan put forward by President Zelensky and accompanying documents concerning security guarantees as well as post-war reconstruction of Ukraine.

EICHER: President Zelenskyy is saying that they are much closer to a deal than ever before…the figure he gave was “90 percent there…” What's changed since the last meeting?

HARDIE: Well, I think in Mar-a-Lago, President Trump endorsed some of the plans surrounding security guarantees and post-war reconstruction. There is still no consensus, though, on the thorny issue of what to do with Ukraine's Donbas region in the eastern part of the country. This is a territory demanded by Putin and that Kyiv is very reluctant to give up. There have been some kind of compromises discussed, but as I say, still no consensus, and that's putting aside the fact that Russia will object, not only to Ukraine's position on Donbas, but many other of the points in that 20 point plan.

EICHER: So what else is getting in the way, aside from the Donbas issue?

HARDIE: Right. So if you think about Putin's basic reason for starting this war, it's to try to arrest the movement of Ukraine towards the West. Lock it within Russia's sphere of influence. He wants to, for example, outlaw Western military presence in Ukraine, force Ukraine to forswear its ambitions of joining NATO, including by changing its constitution, put very stringent caps on Ukrainian armed forces and a whole host of other demands. Kiev, of course, rejects all of that, and its kind of emerging consensus with Washington would really fly in the face of many of those Russian demands. Again, aside from the territory issue. And the Kremlin has been very clear in recent weeks, saying that the emerging proposal coming out of these meetings between Washington and Kiev and the Europeans are just completely unacceptable to the Kremlin. So there's a long way to go to kind of bridge that gap.

REICHARD: After the Sunday meeting, Trump had a phone call with Russian President Putin. He said afterward it was “positive.” Is there any indication that Putin is moving?

HARDIE: So no, I think Putin, in recent weeks, has been really adamant about sticking to his maximalist demands. He often dresses and fatigues and these scripted meetings with military officials to tout supposed Russian battlefield progress and kind of making the case that if Kyiv refuses to give up territory, Russian forces will take it regardless. I think you know, there's a lot of caveats to that claim, one being that if you look at the current rate of Russian advances, it is very far from clear that Russia could take the rest of the Donbass before running out of steam. So despite the fact that President Trump seems to think Ukraine would be better off conceding that territory, now I think Kyiv does have good reason to stick to its guns.

EICHER: John you have deep knowledge about this area of the world. Is there anything we’re not hearing about in the West that we should understand that you think we’re not getting from our media?

HARDIE: I think, you know, President Trump is of the view that you know this, this struggle, this war, can be resolved, through diplomacy and perhaps there is a settlement that will at least pause the fighting. But this is something that Russia views as a generational, even existential struggle with not only Ukraine, but with its Western backers. And part of a bid to kind of rewrite the security order in Europe that emerged after the Cold War. So this isn't going to end with this war, and that really puts an emphasis on when and if the fighting stops, making Ukraine a so-called Steel porcupine hard to swallow, and a continued US commitment to conventional defense in Europe.

REICHARD: A steel porcupine. I’ve never heard that before. John Hardie is Deputy Russia Program Director for Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Thanks for your time today. I really appreciate it.

HARDIE: Thank you.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Up next :A look back at some of the most significant religious liberty stories of the year, with WORLD’s Steve West.

REICHARD: Well, Steve, 2025 is just about in the history books! You’re sending out the last of your Liberties Newsletter of the year. So let’s talk about some of the stories from the legal beat you’ve been watching.

STEVE WEST: I like to break down these stories into three categories: religious liberty, free speech, and parental rights—although there’s quite a bit of overlap.

Religious Liberty

REICHARD: Alright, good way to think of these. Let’s start with that first one, religious liberty and its corollary religious autonomy—the idea that we don’t need the government second guessing how churches and religious nonprofits operate.

WEST: I’m happy to report good news in that arena! Back in August a federal appeals court reaffirmed the right of World Vision—an evangelical humanitarian organization—to rescind an employment offer to someone who was in a same-sex relationship. Its legal basis to do that is called the ministerial exception. That’s a doctrine derived from the First Amendment that protects decisions to hire and fire employees who serve vital religious functions. And that trumps state anti-discrimination laws.

REICHARD: If I recall, in that case the person’s job involved talking to donors and that was deemed to be a vital religious function. But broaden that out: what if it’s the person who cleans the offices?

WEST: That’s where the decision falls short. World Vision requires all its employees to sign onto its statement of faith and standards of conduct. That argument wasn’t addressed at all, whether a religious organization has a right to ensure that all of its employees are on board with its messaging. But it was addressed earlier in the year in the 2d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

REICHARD: Okay, and that case involved pro-life pregnancy centers, right?

WEST: That’s right. New York had a law on its books that required pregnancy centers to hire people who did not agree with its mission. Can you imagine that? I’m happy to report that the 2nd Circuit ruled the state violated the centers’ right of “expressive association.” Meaning, the right of the organization to hire only those employees who affirm the pro-life mission. So that’s broader protection than the decision in the World Vision case.

REICHARD: Those are lower court rulings. Even more encouraging is when we get unanimous Supreme Court rulings for religious liberty. And we got that in 2025, didn’t we?

WEST: And with a majority opinion authored by Sonia Sotomyor, no less! Just before its summer recess, Catholic Charities won its case against the state of Wisconsin. The court ruled the state discriminated against the Roman Catholic nonprofit by excluding it from a tax exemption most religious organizations receive. Basically, the state denied the exemption because it said Catholic Charities was “not religious enough” - because it fed the hungry but didn’t worship or evangelise. And the court said it was wrong to demonstrate a denominational preference.

REICHARD: In other words, Wisconsin, you don’t get to say what’s religious enough.

WEST: Right.

Free Speech

REICHARD: Alright, let’s move on to that second category, free speech. Highlight a couple of cases this year from that area of law?

WEST: Well, free speech disputes often involve downright offensive speech. But these cases remind us that the answer to bad speech is not to shut it down. The answer is more speech.

REICHARD: You know, free speech within the context of immigration enforcement is something we’ve heard more about this year.

WEST: That’s right, and a prime example was the case of that Columbia University graduate, Mahmoud Khalil. The Trump administration sought to deport him because of his role in pro-Palestinean protests—statements in support of Hamas, for example. But a federal judge released Khalil, finding that he engaged in constitutionally protected political speech and that he was not a flight risk.

REICHARD: I think it’s important to point out that doesn’t mean speech can never be regulated, though.

WEST: Correct, speech that threatens imminent violence, for example.Or speech by students in a high school that substantially disrupts the operation of the school. Reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of speech is fine.

REICHARD: What about speech by a student that isn’t on campus?

WEST: It’s possible off-campus speech can be that disruptive, but it’s a high bar. Last month the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a public school cannot discipline students for off-campus speech it views as offensive. What happened is that a student posted an offensive picture on SnapChat that upset a lot of students. Some perceived it as racially biased. And the court said just because it offended some students, that’s not enough reason to censor his off-campus speech.

Parental Rights

REICHARD: Alright, on to the last category of cases, parental rights. Back in June, parents got some help to counter school districts intent on foisting gender ideology on their kids.

WEST: Right, the case was Mahmoud v Taylor. The conservative majority on the Supreme Court sided with parents in Maryland who wanted to opt out of storybooks with heavy LGBTQ-themes that were offensive to parents’ religious beliefs.

REICHARD: Sounds like you could have included this under the religious liberty category?

WEST: Right. That’s the overlap I mentioned. This decision boosts parental rights but rests on free exercise of religion. It’s a helpful decision, but doesn’t answer the question of how far the right to opt-out reaches. For example, can parents opt their children out of a class discussion on evolution.

REICHARD: An opt-out option may help parents guard against indoctrination of their children, so long as they even know what the school is up to. There’s also that lawsuit in California that challenges the school’s “no-tell” policy that instructs teachers not to tell parents that their child is socially transitioning from girl to boy or vice versa.

WEST: Yeah, in that case, two teachers took on a school district that forced them to follow a state and local school district policy encouraging gender transitions. A federal judge who temporarily blocked the policy in 2023 made it permanent in a ruling just before Christmas. He called what the state and school district did a "trifecta of harm” against parents, teachers, and students. The other good news is that the lawsuit was certified as a class action, its ruling will extend to all similarly situated teachers, parents, and students in all of California. And that could be a big help to similar challenges across the country.

REICHARD: To learn more about each of these stories or to subscribe to our free weekly newsletter Liberties, visit wng.org. 

AUDIO: Diversa… increíble… maravillosa ... uhh, rico.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Diverse, incredible, wonderful bread.

AUDIO: It is absolutely delicious.

That’s the word on the street in Mexico City after the country’s “bread culture” came under international criticism.

Richard Hart is a baker well-known in UK foodie circles.

AUDIO: They don’t really have much of a bread culture… they make tortas on these white, ugly rolls that’re pretty cheap …

Oof, that’s no bueno.

AUDIO: Ay, para mí es unidad.

Student Dana Severi-ano, saying, “for me, bread is family time. We get it almost every night. We eat it together—my dad’s crazy about it. Bread simply feels like unity and home.”

Well, by week’s end, Hart said was sorry, and the apology did land—because in Mexico, bread culture evidently doesn’t lower itself to argument and insult.

It rises, as good bread should.

It’s The World and Everything in It.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Today is Tuesday, December 30th. Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day.

Good morning. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

Coming next on The World and Everything in It: a horse-racing legend who became an advocate for the disabled.

The sports world said goodbye this year to figures who defined entire eras—icons in the ring, on the field, and behind the microphone.

Professional wrestling star Hulk Hogan, whose later years included a strong Christian testimony. Beloved baseball broadcaster Bob Uecker. NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue. Hall-of-Fame second baseman Ryne Sandberg. Basketball great Lenny Wilkens. And heavyweight boxing champion George Foreman, who went on to become a Christian minister.

REICHARD: Today, we focus on one name whose place in sports history is also secure: Ron Turcotte, the jockey who rode Secretariat to a Triple Crown victory in 1973.

WORLD’s Jenny Rough has his story.

RACE CALLER: They’re at the post, all standing well as we wait for the start.

JENNY ROUGH: May 5th, 1973. The Kentucky Derby. Jockey Ron Turcotte anticipated breaking out of the stall with Secretariat, the favored horse.

RACE CALLER: Secretariat throws his head a bit. And they’re off!

But Turcotte and Secretariat were last out of the starting gate. Secretariat’s style was to advance from behind. By the final stretch of the mile-and-a-quarter race, everything had changed. Turcotte leaned forward.

RACE CALLER: Ron Turcotte uses the right-handed whip twice.

He chirped into Secretariat’s ear, a signal to run faster.

RACE CALLER: Secretariat on the outside to take the lead. At the wire it’s going to be Secretariat. He wins it! Secretariat just broke the old Kentucky Derby record.

That record still stands. Two weeks later, Turcotte rode Secretariat to victory in the Preakness. And three weeks after that, the Belmont Stakes, where he won by a jaw-dropping 31 lengths. Those records still stand, too. The Triple Crown victory shot the jockey to international fame.

Ron Turcotte, affectionately known as Ronnie, was born on July 22nd, 1941, in Canada. The third of twelve children. He dropped out of 8th grade to work as a lumberjack with his dad.

JOCELYN RUSSELL: And so he handled the big horses that they would chain up the logs to and drag them out. So he was very good with horses.

That’s artist Jocelyn Russell, who sculpted a monument of Turcotte riding Secretariat.

RUSSELL: But he didn’t know much about racing.

At 18, Turcotte left home to find better work in Toronto. Here’s audio of an interview with him from the documentary Secretariat’s Jockey:

RON TURCOTTE: The landlord asked me, “Why don’t you try the racetrack?” He says, “You look small enough to be a jockey.” I said, “What’s a jockey?” He says, “The little boys in the white pants.”

Turcotte was five feet one inch. He started as a hot walker at Windfields Farm, cooling down horses after their workout.

SOUND: [Bugle call]

He began racing in 1961 and quickly became Canada’s champion jockey. In 1963, he moved to the United States to compete. Two years later, he married his childhood sweetheart and together they had four daughters.

After Turcotte moved to the States, trainer Lucien Laurin connected him to the Chenery Family. They owned Meadow Stable, a prestigious racing operation in Central Virginia.

LEEANNE LADIN: This was his particular stall. The colt showing the most promise got this stall.

Leeanne Ladin gives tours there.

Secretariat's stablemate was a horse named Riva Ridge. And Turcotte was instrumental in Riva’s success, too. Riva was afraid of other horses on the track.

LADIN: And Ronnie asked Lucien Laurin, could he take some extra time with Riva? And jockeys don’t usually do this, to get him to overcome his fear of other horses. So they would gallop three abreast with Riva in the middle, and do some bumping and all of like that. And Ronnie cured Riva of that fear.

But Riva didn’t run well on the muddy track at the Preakness in 1972, and that cost them the Triple Crown. Secretariat could run on anything. Here’s Turcotte in the documentary Big Red’s Last Race:

TURCOTTE: When he runs, he runs so fast, it’s like piloting a jet, you just push the accelerator and he goes on. I don’t think bad conditions will affect the horse at all. He’s always impressed me that he would run on broken bottles.

Sculptor Russell said when Turcotte raced Secretariat he’d pull the bit back in the horse’s mouth.

RUSSELL: So what we would think of “Whoa!” — it was, “Go!”

LEONARD LUSKY: That is a real intuitive thing between horse and rider.

That’s Leonard Lusky. He became Turcotte’s business partner and friend.

LUSKY: And I don’t know that any other jockey would have figured that out with Secretariat in time. They got each other.

Turcotte won over 3,000 races. He once said he was never scared of dying—only of becoming paralyzed. In a 1978 race, Turcotte’s horse clipped heels with another, catapulting Turcotte over the horse’s head.

LUSKY: The worst part of a spill is getting hit by the trailing horses, because you can really get damaged. He seemed to avoid that, so people at first thought, oh, this doesn’t look too bad.

Turcotte explained what happened:

TURCOTTE: My legs were crossed, something like, you know I saw my legs twisted, and I went to straighten them out. And when I touched my legs it was like I was touching someone else’s legs.

He was 38. He never walked or raced again. Lusky said Turcotte relied on his faith.

LUSKY: His faith undoubtedly was the pillar to so much of his success, I think both before and after the accident.

Russell agrees.

RUSSELL: He was a very strong believer and it echoed through everything he did and said throughout his life.

He lived with incredible pain. But he said—

TURCOTTE: I just thank God every time I open my eyes every morning.

Turcotte began working with other injured jockeys.

LUSKY: He became a big advocate for the Permanently Disabled Jockeys Fund. It’s an organization that funds disabled riders because riders are not employees. They don’t get insurance and so forth, so there are many riders who when they’re injured, I mean, their lives are over, basically, for the working part. So this was a group he was very passionate about.

He became the face of the organization, which gave him a new purpose, counseling hurt jockeys and encouraging the healthy riders.

Lusky describes Turcotte as optimistic.

LUSKY: When my little boys were young, probably 2 and 3, and he would come to the house. They would say, Can we go for a roller coaster ride? Because they did know really what a wheelchair was. And he’d put them on his lap and they’d climb all over him. He was just so kind that way. He really was one of my favorite people in life.

Ron Turcotte died on August 22nd at age 84.

Reporting for WORLD, I’m Jenny Rough.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. Winter’s been brutal in parts of Canada, but WORLD Opinions contributor James Wood says the deeper chill has nothing to do with the weather.

JAMES WOOD: This winter has been especially cold in southern Ontario. Snow has covered my backyard since the second week of November. And while my young children still delight in the novelty of winter, I find myself wondering how long the cold will last—and how deep it will run.

The question is not just meteorological. There is another kind of chill settling over Canada this season, one that has less to do with the weather and more to do with the public practice of Christian faith.

In September, Canada’s Liberal government introduced Bill C-9, or the so-called Combating Hate Act. It is in response to a documented rise in police-reported hate crimes. Particular attention has been paid to the alarming increase in antisemitic harassment, especially incidents tied to extremist networks in Quebec. The stated aim of the bill is both understandable and laudable: to ensure that genuinely hateful conduct can be investigated and prosecuted more effectively.

Yet how we go about that matters. In its current form, Bill C-9 threatens to chill not only hateful speech, but also authentic Christian teaching. The bill proposes amendments to the Criminal Code intended to remove what its proponents describe as “hindrances” to hate-crime prosecutions. Two of those changes are especially concerning for Christians.

First, Bill C-9 would repeal a long-standing “good faith” defense for religious expression. Since 1970, a provision in the Criminal Code has ensured that Canadians cannot be convicted of hate-propaganda offenses simply for expressing opinions, in good faith, rooted in Scripture or other religious texts. This protection has been narrowly framed and carefully interpreted by courts. Courts have consistently affirmed that only the most extreme forms of speech fall within the scope of hate-propaganda law.

In its current form, Bill C-9 would eliminate that safeguard altogether. Without the good-faith defense, prosecutors will find it easier to pursue charges where religious teaching is deemed to “willfully promote hatred” against protected groups…including those defined by sexual orientation or gender identity.

Traditional Christian doctrine is not ambiguous on such questions. Scripture affirms the created distinction between male and female, presents heterosexual marriage as normative, and describes certain sexual behaviors as sinful. These teachings are not expressions of hostility toward persons. They are moral claims embedded in a comprehensive theological vision about God’s good design for our human existence. What some refer to as “natural law” or “creation order.” Yet under Bill C-9’s revised framework, such teaching could invite investigation simply by being publicly articulated.

Second, the bill would remove the requirement that prosecutors obtain the consent of a provincial attorney general before proceeding with hate-speech charges. That requirement has long served as a crucial gatekeeping mechanism. It ensures that cases advance only where there is a reasonable prospect of conviction and a clear public interest. Eliminating it lowers the threshold for investigation and increases the likelihood of complaints initiated by private individuals.

The most likely outcome is not a wave of pastors imprisoned for preaching Romans 1. However, a more subtle and serious danger lurks behind the change. Churches, ministries, and clergy could find themselves drawn into protracted and costly legal processes, even where convictions are improbable. The mere prospect of investigation—now without attorney general oversight—exerts a chilling effect on Christian witness. Sermons grow cautious. Teaching on contested moral questions is softened or quietly avoided. Conferences are postponed or canceled. Materials go unpublished. All of this can occur without a single guilty verdict.

To be clear, the problem is not that Canada seeks to combat hatred. The problem is that the law now risks erasing a distinction essential to moral reasoning itself: the difference between hatred of persons and disagreement over ideas and practices—between malice and moral conviction. When that distinction collapses, the public square becomes inhospitable to any tradition that makes substantive truth claims. A society that marginalizes Christian truth in its public life is unlikely to become more humane.

I’m James Wood.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Tomorrow: a look back at the biggest political stories of the year with Hunter Baker on Washington Wednesday. And, remembering Charlie Kirk. That and more tomorrow.

I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio. WORLD’s mission is Biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

The Bible says: “Praise the Lord! Sing to the Lord a new song, his praise in the assembly of the godly!” —Psalm 149:1

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.