The World and Everything in It: July 11, 2024

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by listeners like us. Hi, my name is Patrice Brink, and I live in Landenberg, Pennsylvania. I'm the proud mother of three and grandmother of two, and I hope you enjoy today's program.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: Good morning! Religious liberty threats in Oregon have implications for Christians in the public square.

AUDIO: There’s people of good faith on both sides, but we don’t have to get foster care kids caught in the middle.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: Also, the Pope addresses artificial intelligence. And one woman in need finds hope in helping others.

SJAARDA: I guess I’ve realized more and more that everybody has a story.

And WORLD commentator Cal Thomas on the controversy over “Project 2025.”

MAST: It’s Thursday, July 11th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Lindsay Mast.

BUTLER: And I’m Paul Butler. Good morning!

MAST: Time for news. Here’s Mark Mellinger.

MARK MELLINGER, NEWS ANCHOR: More pressure on Biden to step down » The pressure on President Biden to give up his reelection bid is intensifying.

An eighth Democrat in the U.S. House, Pat Ryan of New York, is now asking Biden to step aside.

And in an appearance on MSNBC, House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi didn’t throw the president much of a lifeline.

PELOSI: It’s up to the president to decide if he is going to run. We’re all encouraging him to make that decision because time is running short.

The president has also lost a prominent supporter in Hollywood. The actor George Clooney, who just hosted a fundraiser for Biden last month, wrote in a New York Times op-ed Wednesday that the president should not run after all.

Biden’s next big public test is a news conference today as he wraps up hosting world leaders for a NATO summit.

Biden & White House push back, schedule Lester Holt interview » President Biden remains defiant, insisting he’s not going anywhere, and he is getting support from his cabinet.

Health & Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra says Biden’s gotten more done than any president he’s ever worked with.

XAVIER BECERRA: Everyone’s always tried to take on what we call Big Pharma. No one succeeded until Joe Biden.

Becerra referring to the president’s push to lower prescription drug costs.

Biden, meantime, will seek to persuade skeptics himself on Monday when he sits down for a primetime interview with NBC anchor Lester Holt.

NATO: China a ‘decisive enabler’ of Russia » A strong rebuke of China from NATO leader Jens Stoltenberg.

STOLTENBERG: China has become a decisive enabler of Russia’s war against Ukraine.

During this week’s summit in Washington, NATO leaders went on to criticize China for what they call its “no-limits partnership” with Russia, including large-scale support for Russia’s defense industry.

NATO ignored Beijing’s denial of direct military aid and urged China to cease all support for Russia.

All NATO allies approved of the condemnation of China. Stoltenberg says it’s the first time they’ve all stated the concern so clearly together.

Israel: Gaza City evac order, ceasefire & hostage talks continue » Israel’s military is urging all Palestinian civilians to leave Gaza City ahead of a broadening Israeli offensive.

Israeli government spokesman David Mencer:

MENCER: We want to get civilians out of harm's way. We have no interest in harming civilians in Gaza City or anywhere else. We're trying to get to the terrorists where the terrorists attack from or where they have set up base.

The evacuation order suggests Israel is pressing ahead with a bombardment throughout the territory, which Gaza officials say has left dozens dead over the past few days.

Israel says it’s pursuing Hamas terrorists who are regrouping there.

GALLANT: [Speaking Hebrew]

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant saying Israel’s military has wounded or killed roughly 60 percent of Hamas’ fighting force and disbanded nearly 24 Hamas battalions.

Meanwhile, international mediators are hoping to forge a cease-fire deal between Israel and Hamas that would secure the release of the remaining hostages.

Among the sticking points: Hamas is demanding any cease-fire be permanent, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he won’t sign any deal that leaves remnants of Hamas still in place.

Beryl latest: Texas still struggling » People in Texas are still dealing with massive power outages days after Hurricane Beryl made landfall in that state.

At one point yesterday, more than 1.7 million homes and businesses were still without electricity.

That’s down from a peak of over 2.7 million after the storm made landfall Monday.

With Houston facing a heat wave, that means lots of people are facing 100-plus degree temperatures without air conditioning.

Republican Senator Ted Cruz told reporters he wasn’t immune and neither was Lt. Governor. Dan Patrick.

CRUZ: Right now, Dan and I both. Neither of us have power. So, I slept on the couch of a buddy of mine yesterday who thankfully did have AC.

Leaders say extra crews are working around the clock to get the lights and AC back.

CRUZ: CenterPoint has committed to having 11,500 linemen coming in from all across Texas and from other adjoining states to be out there right now, repairing the work.

But state leaders say it’ll still take days to resolve all of the outages.

HOUSE: On this vote, the yeas are 221, the nays are 198. The bill is passed.

SAVE Act passes U.S. House » And with that, the U.S. House has passed the so-called SAVE Act: a bill requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration.

With their convention just days away, Republicans are working to shine the spotlight on election security, one of their key issues.

GOP Representative Elise Stefanik…

STEFANIK: This is a very simple and logical concept rooted in the Constitution. Only American citizens should vote in American elections.

But the bill faces strong opposition in the Democrat-led Senate.

Democrats say there are already safeguards against noncitizen voting. They also warn it could disenfranchise legitimate voters.

I’m Mark Mellinger.

Straight ahead: Technology and theology at the G7 summit. Plus, finding hope for the future at a food pantry.

This is The World and Everything in It.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: It’s Thursday the 11th of July, 2024. This is WORLD Radio and we are so glad to have you along with us today. Good morning, I’m Lindsay Mast.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: And I’m Paul Butler.

First up on The World and Everything in It: Religious liberties out west.

Two cases currently in federal court in the state of Oregon raise the stakes for Christians living out their faith, both in the workplace and in foster care.

Here’s WORLD’s Mary Reichard talking about these cases with legal reporter Steve West.

MARY REICHARD: Steve, good morning.

STEVE WEST: Good morning, Mary.

REICHARD: Steve, we talked about the story of Jessica Bates back in May 2023. She’s a widow with five children, and she wanted to adopt more children out of foster care. Bates went through the application process and underwent a home study two years ago. But the state decided she was not eligible to adopt, because she was unwilling to do the state’s bidding if a child expressed gender confusion.

Bates sued and Alliance Defending Freedom represents her. What has happened since filing her lawsuit last Spring?

WEST: You know, Bates wanted a court order to block the state from excluding her from the state's foster care program that's called a preliminary injunction. After all, she met all the qualifications and was willing to accept and love any child she said, as a Christian, though she could not do some of the things the state considered as support for the child, like using pronouns that didn't match the child's sex, or taking the child to a Pride Parade, or letting the child dress ss the opposite sex. Last November, a federal judge ruled against her, and then she appealed, and on Tuesday, a three judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case,

REICHARD: And you listened to that. What were some of the highlights from oral arguments?

WEST: Well after the hearing, that outcome, the outcome of the hearing is far from clear. Circuit Judge Richard Clifton questioned what right Bates had to dictate how she would care for a foster child who is, after all, in the state's custody. At one point, he even suggested the lawsuit was “contrived.” Circuit Judge Michael Hawkins also didn't seem enthused about Bates’ position. These two judges were appointed by George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, respectively, but it was a Donald Trump appointee that really drilled down on the issues. Circuit Judge Daniel Bress peppered the state's attorney with questions about his argument that the state's policy regulated conduct, not speech, and so was not subject to the First Amendment. In this exchange, he asked about pamphlets that were provided to Bates during the foster care training she received.

BRESS: But it's I mean, reading the pamphlets, it seems sort of central, right? The pronouns, right? The use of specific pronouns, the strong suggestion to use particular flags or other kinds of things to educate and show children, examples of positive experiences of people who have, you know, similar gender and sexual identity, right? All of this is all all speech-related. It's all speech.

Bress went on to suggest that the state's policy is not neutral, but discriminates against people with Bates religious convictions. Since the state was providing guidelines for how parents should talk about gender and sexuality with foster children.

BRESS: Doesn't it seem clear that the people who are most likely to have difficulty with this policy, or people who have a certain religious viewpoint about sexual orientation…?

THOENNES: I don't, I don't think I agree with that, Your Honor. But even if that's true in the abstract, as long as the rule is neutral and generally applicable, there just isn't a free exercise problem, of course, so long as we satisfy rational basis review.

BRESS: Right, but I guess it gets to the question of whether the rule is neutral, right?

REICHARD: Steve, you want to predict the outcome based on what you heard. I know it's always tricky to do that.

WEST: It is always tricky, and yet here I predict a two one ruling in favor of the state teeing the case up for a possible review by the full 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, or perhaps by the Supreme Court. Bress, who is a Trump appointee, is most likely to go with Bates, as he clearly felt that this policy fell disproportionately on religious people. I think Bates, Attorney Jonathan Scruggs really got to what's at stake in his closing remarks.

SCRUGGS: Just wrapping up Your Honor, I want to acknowledge that this is a controversial topic. There's people of good faith on both sides, but we don't have to get foster care kids caught in the middle. Oregon can comply with the Constitution, achieve its goals and allow Ms. Bates to provide a loving home for a child who desperately needs it.

REICHARD: All right, turning now to another controversial religious liberties case, what can you tell us about the youth 71 five ministries in Medford, Oregon.

WEST: This is a Christ centered youth mentoring program. It's been operating for over 60 years in Oregon. The staff mentor young people from all backgrounds and religions, providing vocational training and recreational activities, and they go to wherever the kids are, group homes, detention centers or the ministry's own centers. They also received grants from the state's Department of Education, including one in July of last year of $400,000 that's the one that three months later, the state pulled saying the ministry was disqualified because of its hiring practices, meaning the ministry's requirement that staff and volunteers sign a statement of faith. It wasn't anything new, the same language as always.

REICHARD: So the ministry takes its case to court, and a federal judge rules against it. Now it’s asking the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to weigh in. Steve, what was the lower court’s rationale for siding with the state?

WEST: The judge said that the denial of funding had nothing to do with the ministry's religious character, but was because it discriminates in its employment practices. The judge also rejected the ministry's religious autonomy argument. He noted that it was an affirmative defense against suit by a disgruntled church employee, not a standalone right that can be wielded against the state agency. In other words, you can use it defensively when you're sued, but not offensively when you're the one suing.

REICHARD: Steve I’m curious as to how recent Supreme Court precedent affects these cases?

WEST: There's a line of cases ruled on by the Supreme Court since 2017 that hold that the government violates the Free Exercise Clause when it excludes religious persons or organizations from otherwise available public benefits because of their religious character, activity or exercise, and the court has never limited the religious autonomy doctrine. It's a rule that prevents courts from second guessing the doctrines of religious organizations or their governance, including who they can hire or fire. So you add that to the fact that this appeals court last year protected the right of a chapter of Fellowship of Christian Athletes in San Jose to require its student leaders to sign a statement of faith. So with all of that, I think there strong precedent that should help on appeal.

REICHARD: Steve West is a legal reporter for WORLD. Thanks so much for this report.

WEST: Thanks for having me, Mary.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: Coming up next on The World and Everything in It: Christians and artificial intelligence.

Last month, Pope Francis weighed in at this year’s meeting of the G-7. That’s the Group of Seven nations including the United States, Japan, Canada, and four Western European countries.

One issue the pope addressed is artificial intelligence, saying the church and nations should be concerned about it.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: How should Christians across denominations be involved with AI and what are leaders saying?

WORLD Radio’s Mary Muncy reports.

POPE FRANCIS: No technology is neutral, no technology is neutral, I repeat.

MARY MUNCY: At the G7 Summit, Pope Francis, speaking through a translator, cautioned leaders that artificial intelligence could be a great tool, but it could also humble nations.

POPE FRANCIS: To speak of technology means speaking of what it means to be human and therefore our unique condition between freedom and responsibility.

Francis asked the leaders not to view technological advancement as the cure for the world’s troubles—nor pursue progress with abandon.

POPE FRANCIS: It’s up to each to make good use of it and it’s up to politics to create the conditions whereby this good use is possible and fruitful.

Governments all over the world are wrestling with how to regulate AI without stifling innovation. But without a consistent moral framework, creating guidelines has been slow.

The G7’s current guidelines include promoting the safety and security of democracy and upholding human rights.

Some companies have also started creating their own testing mechanisms to lessen the need for government regulation.

But other companies are moving in the opposite direction. Industry leader OpenAI drew criticism earlier this year for disbanding its committee on long term safety. This follows leaders resigning citing irresponsibly fast development.

In response to this confusion, religious leaders like Pope Francis and others hope to bring clarity to the situation.

JASON THACKER: I think the Pope is right in saying that people of faith need to be part of these conversations.

Jason Thacker is assistant professor of philosophy and ethics at Boyce College. He helped the Southern Baptist Convention create its statement last year.

THACKER: Christians specifically have an opportunity to speak in, to speak to the image of God, to issues of human dignity, and how we frame that in light of God's world and God's creation.

The SBC’s position statement acknowledges that the fall affects every part of humanity, including the technologies we create, and that Christ has power over all of it.

The statement emphasizes that AI has a unique power to shape our view of reality. Sometimes it’s small things like algorithms that affect what you see first on social media or a news site, or the first answers that pop up when you ask Google a question. But AI can also have life-or-death consequences.

THACKER: AI is affecting human dignity when we think of warfare, when we engage in wars and international wars, the use of drones, the use of cyber attacks and things to realize that technology is shaping our view, our love of neighbor, and how we even think about pursuing justice in a very broken world.

Pope Francis and the Southern Baptist Convention’s statements put the onus on developers and governments to make sure that humans are still making human decisions, but that raises a question: Why should humans make these decisions?

TREVOR SUTTON: For a long time, intelligence has been the defining feature of being human.

Trevor Sutton is a Lutheran pastor and writer on Christianity and technology.

SUTTON: What's happening is we are looking at AI and its intelligence, this artificial intelligence, and we are saying this is pretty intelligent. In fact, this might be more intelligent than we are in some areas.

Sutton says that notion contributes to the anxiety around AI. But while these models can tell you information, they cannot empathize, or provide wise counsel.

That’s one of the things that the SBC’s statement addresses—AI does not have a soul.

SUTTON: If we go to Genesis 2, recognizing that being human means being a creature created by God, being human in some way is, is essentially tied up with having the breath of life endowed by God. And so with that in mind, I think we can make a really strong argument that AI will never, ever take the place of being human.

Sutton says that can help Christians strike a balance between optimism and pessimism on emerging technologies. Then people can use AI for things like automating repetitive tasks while regulating its use in weapons or things that affect mental health.

And Thacker agrees. He says AI hype has come in waves since the 1950s, and so far, it hasn’t ushered in utopia, or the end of the world.

THACKER: We have a hope. We know that Jesus is alive. We know that Jesus is sitting at the right hand of the Father, that death has been defeated. So we don't have to kind of uncritically fear these technologies, nor put our hope in them.

Reporting for WORLD, I’m Mary Muncy. 

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: We’ve all seen “do not litter” signs with warning about fines. That didn’t seem to work in one town on Long Island, though. So it has a new strategy: trash-talk those litter bugs!

New signs pose a question to litterers as to why they are dumping trash in public. A few multiple choice options include “I am lazy,” and “I don’t care about natural areas.” Or this one:

RICHARD SHAFFER: Your mommy still picks up after you.

That’s Richard Shaffer, city supervisor of Babylon, New York, speaking with CBS News.

If these passive aggressive signs don’t work? Babylon city government is also posting videos of faux meetings for “litterers anonymous” and showing a character called “karma” dumping trash in the yard of an offender.

SHAFFER: And so we want to basically show people that if you are littering, you're doing something totally irresponsible and immature.

I guess if you can’t beat ‘em… shame ‘em.

It’s The World and Everything in It.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: Today is Thursday, July 11th. Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day. Good morning. I’m Paul Butler.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: And I’m Lindsay Mast. Coming next on The World and Everything in It: volunteering.

The rate of volunteering in the U.S. is on the decline, according to the Census Bureau. But in one corner of Iowa, volunteers find purpose and fulfillment at a local food pantry.

At this year’s World Journalism Institute college course, student Elena Olvera put together this story.

AUDIO: [Hangers clinking, background dialogue, shopping cart noises]

ELENA OLVERA: Shoppers of all ages browse the racks and shelves of the Hope Food Pantry. Half of them are below the poverty line, and are here not only for food but for clothing, books, even bedding and small pieces of furniture.

For some, going to a food pantry is embarrassing, or even shameful. That isn’t the case here, though, and it’s because of her.

AUDIO: [Barb speaking]

Barb Dubbelde is a native of Sioux Center, Iowa. For the past year and a half, she’s managed the home-goods corner of the food pantry.

BARB DUBBELDE: Every box here has clothes in it, so you can see the sorting and organizing that has to go into it. It’s amazing.

What’s also amazing is that seven years ago, she needed this food pantry—not for work, but for food.

DUBBELDE: I wasn’t able to keep my eye on the ball of everything—raising our kids and his business and my own small business.

Barb isn’t your stereotypical food pantry client. She grew up comfortably and had a job as a hairdresser. Both she and her husband worked to support their family. But one day he came to her with bad news.

DUBBELDE: And he was like, “We’re in major financial debt.”

They found themselves on the brink.

DUBBELDE: I’m like, trusting my husband to take care of it but he was drowning and he didn’t want to tell me, and so Marianne was a client of mine and she said, “Do you guys need food?” when I told her what was happening.

She’s talking about the food pantry’s coordinator Marianne Sjaarda.

MARIANNE SJAARDA: I, of course, know those people, and I know their situation, and they needed to come.

Marianne encouraged Barb to use the food pantry, even though Barb was self-conscious. She worried about taking resources from people who needed them more than she did.

DUBBELDE: I didn’t want to take from anyone that was in more need than us, because we had a home, we had two jobs. And I just didn’t feel it was right. So Marianne would allow me to come in, like after everyone else was done getting food. And it was really hard. It was really humbling.

Barb and her husband were able to use their grocery money for other things, like medical bills and car repairs. Her husband picked up a second job and they worked together to get out of debt. She credits the food pantry for helping them through the worst of it.

These days, Barb is back at the food pantry—but this time, she’s the one giving people hope.

AUDIO: [Barb’s dialogue with other volunteer, “Yes, I’m gonna check my shelves”]

She’s felt the call to do mission work ever since she was a teenager. Now, God’s brought her full circle and her mission field is the food pantry.

Barb isn’t alone. Marianne also understands how important it is to follow God’s call.

SJAARDA: I get a chance to testify to what it looks like to help others. And this isn’t a once and done deal. You were put on this earth for a reason.

To Marianne, helping others looks like running the food pantry, but it also looks like simply meeting shoppers where they are.

SJAARDA: When you’re in the car, and I’m talking to you, you’re the most important person in the world.

She’s also grateful for what the work has taught her.

SJAARDA: I guess I’ve realized more and more that everybody has a story. And don’t put people, or people groups, in boxes because it’s not a one-size-fits-all.

Barb’s family now lives on her husband’s income alone. She devotes her time and attention to the food pantry, even with all the challenges that come with it.

DUBBELDE: It’s definitely a sacrifice for my family because I’m not providing towards our household expenses. And there are times when we go without things that we need.

Still, she says, it’s all worth it.

DUBBELDE: Every trial I’ve gone through, every test that the Lord has given me has brought me here, to serving these people, and I just love them so much.

Reporting for the World Journalism Institute, I’m Elena Olvera.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: Today is Thursday, July 11th, 2024. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Lindsay Mast.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: And I’m Paul Butler. Up next, WORLD commentator Cal Thomas on the controversy around “Project 2025.”

CAL THOMAS: One way to measure the power of conservative policy proposals is to monitor the reaction of the left.

The Heritage Foundation’s ideas for the next conservative president to implement must be good because liberals are hysterical in their opposition. And that’s because they directly challenge the size, power, cost, and reach of the federal government.

The word “Fascist” has gained a certain cachet for the left much like the smear “racist” once was. The New Republic magazine has illustrated the label by portraying Donald Trump as Hitler. It’s designed to keep people from considering the results of policies that aren’t working while ignoring or disparaging policies that have a track record of success.

The Heritage “Project 2025” book is full of credible proposals. Rather than allow opponents to mischaracterize them, people should read them and see whether they are radical or rational.

The document is the work of 400 leading conservative thinkers and organizations. Some proposals will be familiar, like eliminating the useless Department of Education which—given students underperformance in math, science and reading—has clearly flunked its test. Donald Trump says he opposes some of their recommendations, though he admits he hasn’t read them. If he wins the election he likely can be counted on to embrace many of them.

The philosophical foundation is expressed in the introduction to the book: “The federal government is a behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values, with freedom and liberty under siege as never before. The task at hand to reverse this tide and restore our Republic to its original moorings is too great for any one conservative policy shop to spearhead. It requires the collective action of our movement. With the quickening approach of January 2025, we have two years and one chance to get it right.”

Reminiscent of former Speaker Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America,” “Project 2025” makes four promises (specifics are under each one):

Promise #1: Restore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children.” These include doing away with all but two genders, DEI, and other ideas imposed on the country by unelected bureaucrats, and national school choice.

Promise #2: “Dismantle the administrative state and return self-governance to the American people.” The writers explains “Conservatives desire a smaller government not for its own sake, but for the sake of human flourishing. But the Washington Establishment doesn’t want a constitutionally limited government because it means they lose power and are held more accountable by the people who put them in power.” This recalls the philosophy of our 30th president, Calvin Coolidge, who said: “A government which requires of the people the contribution of the bulk of their substance and rewards cannot be classed as a free government, or long remain as such.”

Promise #3: “Defend our nation’s sovereignty, borders, and bounty against global threats.” Is there anyone but liars and the self-deluded who doesn’t believe we have a border problem?

Promise #4: “Secure our God-given individual right to enjoy ‘the blessing of liberty,” by which they mean “Our Constitution grants each of us the liberty to do not what we want, but what we ought.” Restoring oughtness requires the resurrection of a standard by which right and wrong, good and evil can be measured. This begins in our schools and universities which have largely abandoned that standard with results we see in academic underperformance and the violation of laws, sometimes leading to campus violence as we witnessed this spring.

These are not radical or fascist proposals, but what previous generations considered common sense and self-evident truths.

Read the details for yourself and unless you are a hard core leftist, you are likely to agree and vote accordingly to restore what we once had, but have lost to our national shame.

I’m Cal Thomas.

PAUL BUTLER, HOST: Tomorrow: John Stonestreet joins us for Culture Friday. And, just in time for this year’s Olympics, a review of the classic film Chariots of Fire. Plus, Word Play with George Grant. That and more tomorrow.

I’m Paul Butler.

LINDSAY MAST, HOST: And I’m Lindsay Mast.

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: “I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” —Matthew 12:36

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.