The World and Everything in It: July 16, 2024

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by listeners like us. My name is Rochelle White. My husband and I live in Hutchinson, Kansas. When our children were small, we taught them to read WORLD Magazine, and now that they're grown, they're teaching me to listen to podcasts. I hope you enjoy today's program.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning! The Trump classified-documents case: the former president gets a break as a federal judge tosses the charges.

NICK EICHER, HOST: We’ll talk it over with an attorney and expert in constitutional law. Also today, challenges for NATO. And words of wisdom from Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.

JUSTICE ALITO: Right now in the world outside this beautiful campus, troubled waters are slamming against our most fundamental principles.

REICHARD: It’s Tuesday, July 16th. 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 has today’s news.

AUDIO: The great state of South Carolina proudly cast all 50 of its votes for President Donald J. Trump! [cheers]

KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Delegates nominate Trump » A majority of delegates from all U.S. states and territories cast their votes for the former president on day one of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. And House Speaker Mike Johnson made it official.

JOHNSON: Donald J. Trump, having received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast at the convention, has been selected as the Republican Party nominee for President of the United States. 

And with that, Trump made history, becoming just the third Republican to be nominated for president three times joining Richard Nixon and Thomas Jefferson.

And, of course, he is the only Republican ever to be nominated just two days after being shot by a would-be assassin’s bullet.

Vance vice president » And just hours after Trump announced his running mate, he too was nominated.

AUDIO: Ladies and gentleman, I am proud to announce that Senator J.D. Vance has the overwhelming support of this convention to be the next vice president of the United States. [fade cheers under]

The 39-year-old Ohio lawmaker would be the youngest vice president in roughly 70 years.

Vance served 4 years in the U.S. Marine Corps and is an Iraq War combat veteran.

And Ohio Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, just before announcing Vance’s nomination added…

HUSTED: He graduated summa cum laude from Yale Law School and is the author of the best selling book Hillbilly Elegy.

Vance's bestseller about his roots in rural Kentucky and blue-collar Ohio made him a national celebrity in 2016. The book sold more than 1.5 million copies.

Vance was elected to the U.S. Senate just 2 years ago.

Republicans at the convention praised Trump’s choice of Sen. Vance. His fellow GOP Sen. John Kennedy remarked:

KENNEDY:  If I had to pick one word to describe J. D., it would probably be sagacious. And by that I mean he's very astute, he's very thoughtful, he's very rational.

President Biden, though, wasn’t impressed, calling him a “clone” of President Trump on the issues.

RNC security » Security, as one would expect, is extremely tight in Milwaukee. Mayor Cavalier Johnson.

JOHNSON:  The designation that we have here in the city of Milwaukee for this convention is a national special security event. It is the highest designation that, uh, our federal government provides for an event of this caliber, of this magnitude. So I feel pretty confident, uh, in what we've, uh, worked to establish in terms of public safety for this.

The Secret Service and local law enforcement officials also said they were confident in the security measures already in place for this event.

Protestors have gathered outside Mikwaukee’s Fiserv Forum.

AUDIO:  Free, free Palestine! Free, free Palestine! Free, free Palestine!

Some also chanted “no KKK, no fascist USA.” But so far, there have been no security incidents or concerns.

Biden interview/White House on assassination attempt » Less than 24 hours after President Biden delivered an Oval Office address calling on America to turn down the temperature with political rhetoric, he once again called Donald Trump a “threat to democracy.”

In an interview NBC’s Lester Holt asked the president:

HOLT: But have you taken a step back and done some soul searching on things that you might have said that might incite people who are not balanced? 

BIDEN: Well, I don’t think — look, how do you talk about the threat to democracy, which is real.

Biden said it was a mistake to tell donors last week that it was time to “put Trump in the bullseye,” but said Trump’s rhetoric is worse.

BIDEN: Look, I’m not the guy that said I want to be a dictator on day one.

That referring to a remark that Trump made last year in jest, drawing laughter from the crowd which the Which the White House has framed as a serious remark in warning as a threat to democracy.

Biden also again took a past Trump comment out of context saying Trump promised a bloodbath if doesn’t win, while in context the former president was referring to the economy.

Case dismissed » A federal judge has dismissed the classified documents case against Donald Trump.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump was unconstitutional. That’s because Congress never approved Smith’s appointment or funding.

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani said the ruling was a big win for the former president.

RAHMANI: I think that the election fraud cases are potentially more damaging to Donald Trump, but this was the most readily provable case because Trump affirmatively mishandled classified documents and allegedly obstructed justice. So the fact that the strongest case against the former president was dismissed is a huge win for him.

But speaking to Fox’s America’s Newsroom, Kentucky Congressman James Comer said the entire process was politically motivated from the start.

COMER: All these cases that I consider legal warfare against Donald Trump are falling to the side and the American people can focus now on electing the next leader of the free world.

A spokesman for the special counsel’s office says Smith has been authorized to pursue an appeal.

Hamas » The U.S. State Dept. says negotiators are still working to achieve a cease-fire agreement in Gaza. Spokesman Matthew Miller:

MILLER: We continue to talk with the mediators about, as I said, what the remaining sticking points are and some of the practical ideas that we have and that others have for how to bridge the sticking points.

Israeli officials are still trying to determine if a weekend attack in Khan Younis killed Mohamed Deif the leader of Hamas’ military branch

NETANYAHU: [Speaking Hebrew] Mohamed Deif is a master of murders, the Hamas chief of staff, number two in the chain of command. And was the planner and leader of the 7 October massacre.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Deif was the mastermind behind the October 7 terrorist attack against Israel.

But Israeli Defense Forces have confirmed that the strike did kill the commander of the Khan Younis Brigade.

I’m Kent Covington.

Straight ahead: Case dismissed in Donald Trump’s classified documents indictment. Plus, a graduation speech for troubled times.

This is The World and Everything in It.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: It’s Tuesday the 16th of July. This is WORLD Radio and we’re glad to have you along with us today. Good morning, I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. Up first on The WORLD and Everything in It: case dismissed.

President Trump’s legal team is on a roll. It won a big Supreme Court case two weeks ago on presidential immunity, and now the team has persuaded a federal judge to toss out the entire classified-documents case. Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Eileen Cannon ruled that special counsel Jack Smith was wrongly appointed and that has the effect of invalidating his prosecution of Trump, at least for now.

REICHARD: Here to talk about it is Daniel Suhr. He is an attorney and regular contributor to WORLD Opinions. Daniel, Judge Cannon dismissed the case under the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, ruling he was not authorized to conduct this prosecution. How so?

DANIEL SUHR: So it starts with this simple structural feature of the Constitution that when executive officers exercise power, they need to be responsible to the President. And in particular, if officers are going to exercise significant power, they need to be confirmed by the Senate. That's just written into the Constitution. And so in the case of prosecutors, we have 93 United States attorneys. And US Attorneys are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to be the chief prosecutor for each region of the United States. Some states have one, some states have a couple. What the special counsel regulation does is go around the U.S. Attorney process. It essentially says, I, as the attorney general, I as Merrick Garland, am going to circumvent the normal process for prosecuting someone, empowering someone with prosecutorial authority, and instead, I'm just going to pick. And I'm not going to pick without checking with the President first. I'm not going to check with the Senate first. I'm going to give the same power a U.S. attorney has to this individual, but I'm not going to follow the same process, and that's the problem.

REICHARD: So, talk specifically how Jack Smith’s appointment as Special Counsel fell short?

SUHR: Yeah, so Jack Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to look into former President Trump in this and several other cases. But there's no statute authorizing that sort of appointment. In fact, if you remember Mary, we used to have an Independent Counsel statute back in the 1990s and that was what Ken Starr and the various other Clinton investigations took under.

REICHARD: And that was allowed to expire because it didn’t work well.

SUHR: Congress looked back at what happened with President Clinton and said this was not a good process….and yet, now Attorney General Merrick Garland is acting like, well, I'll just call it a "special counsel" rather than an independent counsel, and it'll do the same thing. And all Judge Cannon is saying is, no, you can't circumvent the structure and policy decisions that Congress has made.

REICHARD: So the documents case is dismissed, future hearings are all canceled. Daniel, does this dismissal affect the other Jack Smith prosecution in D.C. about January 6?

SUHR: It does not formally affect it, but it certainly sets a precedent that applies across the board, if other judges agree with Judge Cannon. I think it's interesting in this instance that Justice Clarence Thomas, in his opinion in the in the first Jack Smith immunity case, the immunity case the Supreme Court decided just a few weeks ago, Justice Thomas has a concurring opinion where he says, before we even address the question of presidential immunity, which is what the rest of the Supreme Court focused on, I have a separate problem, namely, I don't think Jack Smith was appointed in the constitutional manner. I don't think he his appointment complies with the appointments clause. And so Justice Thomas had already previewed this problem several weeks ago, and I think it indicates that ultimately this will be an issue that heads the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court is aware of this problem. Judge Cannon's opinion will presumably be appealed. There may be a difference of opinion between the 11th Circuit, which is the geographic region that covers Judge Cannon in Florida, and the DC Circuit, which covers the January 6 prosecution that Jack Smith is bringing. And so ultimately, I would not be surprised if all these issues don't percolate back to the Supreme Court for another decision on Trump versus Jack Smith.

REICHARD: Daniel Suhr is an attorney and regular contributor to WORLD Opinions. Daniel, thank you for your time!

SUHR: Thanks for having me, Mary.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Coming up next on The World and Everything in It: International security.

Last week, NATO marked 75 years of military alliance among 32 nations in the West as a counterweight to the Soviet Union and its successor, Russia.

But Russia is not the only threat facing the West. Here’s Jens Stoltenberg. He’s NATO’s secretary general.

STOLTENBERG: China has become a decisive enabler of Russia's war against Ukraine through its no-limits partnership.

REICHARD: It was President Joe Biden’s news conference that received the most attention. Biden argued that he’s responsible for bringing together a coalition of nations to supply Ukraine’s defense against Russia…while claiming former president Trump would not defend NATO allies if he returns to office.

BIDEN: I've got to finish this job because there's so much at stake.

EICHER: Joining us now is Brad Bowman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He’s head of the think tank’s Center on Military and Political Power.

REICHARD: Brad, good morning!

BRAD BOWMAN: Good morning. How Are you?

REICHARD: Great and so glad you’re here!

Well, we will get to events in Washington, but let’s start with what happened in Butler, Pennsylvania on Saturday. Former President Donald Trump’s life just spared from bullets fired by a man on a roof. We’ve heard the reactions of American politicians. How does this look to our allies and enemies abroad?

BOWMAN: I think in the Kremlin and in Beijing this looks like an opportunity. This looks like an opportunity to continue their long-standing information war against Americans. The primary target of the information war of China and Russia is their own people, right? To try to manipulate the information flow to them so they can retain their autocratic and authoritarian grip on power. But the second most important target for these, these three adversaries, in particular, is the United States and Americans. And they're doing all kinds of things, but one of the things they want to do is they want to divide us and pit us against one another. So that they're loving this. They love this, and they see it as an amazing opportunity. The question is whether Americans will wittingly or unwittingly help our adversaries divide us and do their dirty work for them. As you can tell, my vote is that we—that we not play that game.

REICHARD: Well, how does this all look to our allies, then?

BOWMAN: Yeah, you know, it's a great question. Just just this month, we had the 75th-Anniversary Summit in Washington and those allies understand that America has played and needs to continue to play a central leadership role in the alliance. And so many of the leaders that came to Washington are concerned about President Biden's physical state, and they see some comments coming from former President Trump, with respect to NATO and Ukraine and Russia that they find concerning. And then when you layer on top of that, this horrible attempt on Donald Trump's life, you know, I think I know a lot of our allies are very, very concerned. And this is honestly a period of great uncertainty, just at a time, frankly, when we need to be unified.

REICHARD: As we mentioned earlier, NATO was formed to counter the Soviet Union and communism in Europe. So how would partnerships among Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea change NATO priorities?

BOWMAN: It's a great question. Exactly right. Kind of the foundational purpose for NATO was, you know, as as Lord Ismay, who later became the first Secretary General of NATO, said, was one of the three main things he identified was keeping the Russians out. And, you know, I'll, I'm old enough to remember that a decade or two ago, people saying, oh, you know, hey, you know, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, maybe NATO is kind of looking for a mission here. So maybe we need to go out of area to just area to justify our existence. Well, those days are long gone. Following what Vladimir Putin did in Crimea in 2014 and his invasion in 2022, NATO's fundamental purpose is its foundational purpose, and it's more relevant than ever. They need to deter aggression against the alliance. The number one thing we from need from NATO is to deter aggression, and that's why I’m so happy to see some of the major developments coming out of the summit this month from Washington.

REICHARD: Well, the assassination attempt took over news coverage over the NATO summit, understandably so. But I’ll ask you, is there anything else you think we should be paying attention to related to the summit?

BOWMAN: Yeah, I think, you know, there were several positive things. I'll run through them quickly. So one thing I'd highlight is that we've had a problem in the past with many NATO members not investing sufficiently in their own defense, and this was a big point of contention for former President Trump, and in 2014 only three members of the alliance were paying were spending two percent of their gross domestic product on defense, which means their militaries aren't as ready. Their industrial bases are not what they should be, and they can't help Ukraine and others and operate as effectively along the United States. Well, that number grew to six in 2021. Well, this year it's 23 of 32 so that's amazing progress, but it's still not all of them. So significant progress on spending, but not quite there yet. I'd also flag on the positive columns, dramatically increased posture, military posture in Eastern Europe. The number of battle groups that we have in Eastern Europe have doubled in the last few years, and most of them are not American. They're European. So increased combat power, deterring aggression. And all 32 members of the alliance were unambiguous that Ukraine, in the future, will be a member of NATO, but they were a little less clear on the timing, saying that that will happen when allies decide and their requirements are met, which is pretty ambiguous. So, on balance, I'd say this was a successful meeting, but it was kind of  overshadowed a bit by questions about President Biden. But you know, again, I would come back to our adversaries are more aligned than ever, and Americans need NATO more than ever, and NATO needs America, and so at this decisive moment, I was glad to see America hosting it. And frankly, I'm cautiously optimistic that regardless of who wins the election, that in the end, America will continue to lead this alliance, which, frankly, is one of our great, grand strategic assets.

REICHARD: Brad Bowman is senior director of the Center for Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Brad, thanks for your time.

BOWMAN: Thank you!

NICK EICHER, HOST: Today is Tuesday, July 16th. Thank you for turning to WORLD Radio to help start your day. Good morning. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. Coming next on The World and Everything in It: Legal Docket.

Well, Congressional Democrats maintain the pressure on Supreme Court justices whose opinions they dislike. Last week, Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stood up in the House:

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: I rise today to introduce articles of impeachment against Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Anthony Alito Jr.

EICHER: The day before, Democratic Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Ron Wyden sought the appointment of a special counsel to open a criminal investigation of Justice Thomas.

They accuse him of accepting undisclosed gifts. And both Thomas and Justice Alito they accuse of ignoring supposed conflicts of interest in cases before them and failing to recuse.

Each denies any wrongdoing.

REICHARD: This effort by Ocasio-Cortez is more about starting things than ending them. Republicans control the House and, if push came to shove, a number of Democrats would vote no because they couldn’t live with the precedent.

But they won’t have to. House Speaker Mike Johnson said AOC’s impeachment articles—his words—are going straight into the trash can.

I’ll note that the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg didn’t recuse from the same sex-marriage cases, even though she’d officiated same-sex weddings before they were legal. Justice Elena Kagan didn’t recuse when Harvard’s race-based admissions policy came before the court, even though she is a former dean of Harvard Law School. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson omitted reporting her husband’s consulting income. There’s more, but you get the idea.

EICHER: In light of the furies unleashed upon him, today we will hear Justice Alito’s commencement speech he gave back in May at Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio.

He told the nearly 900 graduates that the Constitution contains lessons for both the Republic and for our personal lives.

Justice Alito spoke for about 20 minutes. We have highlights, used by permission.

REICHARD: He starts with a reference to pop culture of the past, mentioning Rodney Dangerfield, whose character Thornton Mellon delivered a minute-long graduation speech in the movie Back to School in 1986:

JUSTICE ALITO: This is what he said: “To all you graduates, as you go out in the world, my advice to you is, Don't go! It's rough out there! Move back with your parents. Let them pay all the bills and worry about it.”

But as he wanted the day to be happy for both graduates and their parents, he advised the new grads reject that advice and boldly engage the world. Their contributions are vital with a world so rough.

EICHER: Justice Alito then turned to the backbone of his work as a judge and justice: The U.S. Constitution. It’s endured, he said, because it rests on a deep understanding of human nature. It’s only about 46-hundred words, sets out the structure of our government, and protects basic rights. The rest is left to the American people.

And those ideas have a personal application, Alito says:

JUSTICE ALITO: We can make the effort to keep in mind what is fundamental and permanent in our lives. And that is absolutely critical, because the things that call out most loudly for our attention on a daily basis are not necessarily the things that matter most in the end. They are not the things that are going to count on our final report card, and we can all pray that when we receive our final report card, there will be a very generous degree of grade inflation.

REICHARD: Justice Alito pointed to another feature of our Constitution: changing it is difficult. Any amendment needs two-thirds approval of both houses of Congress and then must be ratified by three-quarters of the states. Of the more than 10-thousand constitutional amendments considered, only 27 passed.

EICHER: That’s no accident. It reflects the Framers’ design. They said in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights:

JUSTICE ALITO: That short and famous statement speaks volumes. And one of the most important things it says is that there are certain moral principles that are true and immutable. These principles of right and wrong are not relative or circumstantial. They are not of our making, and it is not within our power to change them, even though at times we might find that convenient. 

Founders also had a realistic understanding of human nature. They did not think that human beings are, or ever will be, angels. On the contrary, humans, at times, may be overcome by fear, anger, envy, sloth, and greed. So they fortified their work against the ill winds they knew would sometimes blow. They knew that times would inevitably come when the people would be tempted to make hurried and unwise changes. The precipitating event might be a domestic or an international crisis. It might be overt or subtle pressure of others, the temptation to take the easy road and just go along. It might be the latest intellectual fad. It might be the perception of where history is going. But whatever the cause, they knew that such times would come, and they knew that in the long run, the country's well being depended on the ability to resist these temptations.

REICHARD: He then pointed to a decision the high court handed down right after the Civil War that held the Framers foresaw that “troublous times” would arise. Times when rulers and people become restive, leading to peril of constitutional principles, without established irreparable law.

JUSTICE ALITO: This same fundamental idea that there are certain principles that we cannot compromise without paying a fearsome price, applies to our personal lives. For almost all of us, there will be troublous times and times of temptation. When they come, if we have fixed and clear principles, principles that are written in bold letters on our hearts, we may be able to find our way through. If we don't, we can easily go astray. Right now in the world outside this beautiful campus, troubled waters are slamming against some of our most fundamental principles. Support for freedom of speech is declining dangerously, especially where it should find broadest and widest acceptance.

Troubled waters lash other freedoms, too.

JUSTICE ALITO: Religious liberty is also threatened. When you venture out into the world, you may find yourself in a job or a community or a social setting where you will be pressured to endorse ideas you don't believe or to abandon core beliefs. It will be up to you to stand firm, it will be up to you to speak out.

EICHER: But the Constitution was also designed to accommodate change. He continued:

JUSTICE ALITO: We are a nation of change. As I said, the founders knew that humans are not angels, but at the same time, they did not expect the Americans who would populate the New Republic they were creating to be self centered individuals, obsessed only with achieving maximum satisfaction of their individual desires. Their ideal of a citizen was very different. It was a person of character who was strong, prudent, temperate and fair, a person who was willing to sacrifice for the good of others, for family members, friends, neighbors and fellow citizens.

Those were traits the Framers saw in ordinary people capable of self government. Traits brought about through teaching, strong families, and institutions. That’s why the Framers allowed for change within reason.

JUSTICE ALITO: In the same way, your challenge during troubled times will be to distinguish between dedication to principles that never change, and mere nostalgia for the past. In order to engage our society and try to make it a better place, that is essential, and that requires judgment and prudence. Our society needs you to do just that.

REICHARD: Justice Alito emphasized reason and respectful argumentation. He said our legal system respects tradition and most any opinion of the court will cite past court decisions. Yet precedent is not written in stone, and sometimes a ruling should be overruled. But not lightly.

JUSTICE ALITO: This principle has application in life as well. We know much more than our ancestors about many things, but not necessarily about what is most important, including the way to live a good and meaningful life. And so there should be a presumption in favor of venerable wisdom.

Finally, Justice Alito ended with this:

JUSTICE ALITO: I congratulate you on what you have achieved, and I look forward with American optimism to see what you will do when, contrary to Rodney Dangerfield's advice, you take the plunge into the real world. Congratulations to all of you. [Applause]

That was Justice Samuel Alito delivering the commencement speech at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Today is Tuesday, July 16th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. Up next…WORLD Opinions commentator Emma Waters on America’s falling birthrate and the misguided approaches to fixing it.

EMMA WATERS: The United States is now in demographic decline. As of 2023, its birth rate reached a new low: 1.62 births on average per woman—well below the 2.1 replacement rate. This is a major problem for national health, as the economy, Social Security, military readiness, and eldercare depend on new generations of children.

In response to the birth shortage, a new movement has arisen in response to the birth shortage—pro-natalists…those who want to see more children born. Their solutions range from the generous financial benefits to artificial wombs. For some, the end goal is an increase in the economy or native-born population growth. For others, it’s personal self-fulfillment as they pursue a certain kind of child.

Still others, who perhaps fall in a middle category, react against the pro-natalist call to have children for one reason or another. As Monica Hesse opines in The Washington Post: “A lot of women don’t want 2.1 kids. We need an economic model in which that’s okay.”

Her point is that when children, and their mothers, are treated like a means to an end, childbearing becomes a collective action problem for someone to solve. It also tends to leave a bad taste in the mouth of women, who often decide to not bear children.

China’s demographic woes serve as a case in point. After decades of its one-child policy—with forced contraceptives, abortions, and adoptions—the Chinese Communist Party reversed course in 2016. It has since lifted restrictions and now incentivizes having children. But it’s not working.

In either scenario, women and their children are treated as a means to China’s national agenda. And now The Wall Street Journal reports many women are “putting themselves ahead of what Beijing and their families want.”

Hesse makes a similar point when she calls for a solution that does not involve an individual woman’s “reproductive system.” After decades of Roe v. Wade and girl-boss feminism that made women feel inferior for prioritizing marriage and children over a formal career, it is no surprise that mainstream women are skeptical.

It is true that having more children would solve many of the looming crises facing our society. But this is not the reason we should have or encourage others to have children.

For many women, the answer is far simpler. They need to trust that the losses and changes of parenthood they might fear—of their bodies, lifestyles, sense of self, and current relationship dynamics—will be worth it. They need to believe that having children is a good that is worth the sacrifice. Jesus’s words about the Christian life in John chapter 12 help illustrate the call of motherhood and fatherhood: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.” 

We need a generation that encourages people, despite the unknowns, to embrace this self-sacrificial call of Christ. It is only then that marriage and children will be celebrated rightly, as a gift received rather than a mere act of the will.

I’m Emma Waters.

NICK EICHER, HOST: Tomorrow: a report from the Republican National Convention. That, World Tour, and more tomorrow.

I’m Nick Eicher.

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

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: “Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!” —Matthew 18:7

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.