The World and Everything in It — August 10, 2020


MARY REICHARD, HOST: Good morning!

First Amendment rights and Covid-19 restrictions continue to come into conflict. Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband will talk to us about what the Department of Justice is doing.

NICK EICHER, HOST: That’s ahead on Legal Docket.

Also the Monday Moneybeat: July jobs makes three straight months of recovery, but we’re not quite halfway back and reopening offices as an expression of corporate social responsibility. 

Plus the WORLD History Book. Today, a somber anniversary…

TRUMAN: A short time ago an American airplane dropped one bomb on Hiroshima, and destroyed its usefulness to the enemy.

And WORLD commentator Kim Henderson on how meaning can get lost in translation.

REICHARD: It’s Monday, August 10th. 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, news with Kent Covington.


KENT COVINGTON, NEWS ANCHOR: Trump issues coronavirus relief executive orders » With talks over a new coronavirus relief bill largely stalled on Capitol Hill, President Trump over the weekend bypassed Congress and took a series of executive actions.

He signed four orders enacting key provisions of a Republican stimulus plan.

TRUMP: First one is I’m providing a payroll tax holiday to Americans earning less than $100,000 per year. 

That presidential memorandum would defer payroll taxes from September 1st through the end of the year, meaning more take-home pay for workers.  

That would use the same part of the tax code that allowed a delay of the 2019 tax deadline earlier this year. But the deferral doesn’t guarantee the taxes won’t ever come due, though the White House says that’s the aim.  

Another order would renew a boost to jobless benefits in the amount of about $400 per week. The $600 per week federal boost expired on August 1st. The other orders are aimed at protecting renters from eviction and pausing student loan payments. 

But Democratic leaders are blasting the move. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer…

SCHUMER: The president’s executive orders, described in one word could be paltry. In three words, unworkable, weak, and far too narrow. 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called them—quote—“an illusion.”

Others have questioned whether the president is overstepping his authority. But the White House says it’s confident the orders will stand up to any legal challenges. 

Bidding war in the works for TikTok » A bidding war may be in the works for the popular smartphone app TikTok as well as WeChat. 

That after President Trump issued a ban on Americans doing business with the Chinese owners of the app. The order gave the owners 45 days to explore a possible sale of the apps, as a significant percentage of TikTok users live in the United States. Twitter and Microsoft are both among the companies vying for the app.

On Sunday, Senator Tom Cotton told Fox News, he agrees with the president’s decision. 

COTTON: To most Americans, TikTok seems like a harmless, fun short form video app. But behind that app on your phone is a vacuum of data, everything on your device: contacts, emails, text messages, social media posts, even browser history, keystrokes, and location data, that all goes back to servers in China. 

He called the app a Chinese “trojan horse” on American cell phones. 

The Trump administration has pointed to TikTok and WeChat as national security threats. 

The app’s owners insist they have never provided data to the Chinese government. 

Activists lash out at government after Beirut explosion » In Beirut, protesters are unleashing their fury over last week’s massive explosion. Demonstrators flooded streets ripped apart by the blasts and stormed government buildings over the weekend. They clashed with security forces who responded by firing tear gas and rubber bullets.

AUDIO: [Sound of protests] 

Dozens were injured and one police officer was killed amid the uprising. 

The massive explosion, which followed a smaller blast, devastated the city’s port killed more than a 150 and injured some 6,000 people. It also left hundreds of thousands homeless and caused an estimated $10 to $15 billion of damage. 

Aya Majzoub of Human Rights Watch told Sky News…

MAJZOUB: They are enraged that so many politicians and public officials were aware that more than 2,700 tons of explosive material was just left in the port for years without any safety measures. 

The disaster has taken popular anger in Lebanon to a new level in a country already reeling from the coronavirus pandemic and an economic crisis.

Activists who called for the protest set up symbolic nooses at Beirut’s Martyrs’ Square. One protester held a banner that read “Resignation or hang.”

Esper: Less than  5,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan by December 1 » Defense Secretary Mark Esper over the weekend announced Pentagon plans to cut the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan to less than 5,000 by the end of November.

ESPER: Right now, we think that we can do all the core missions—first and foremost being ensure the United States is not threatened by terrorists coming out of Afghanistan—we can do those at a lower level. 

The Trump administration has pursued drawdowns of military forces across the Middle East, most notably in Afghanistan and Syria. 

The Pentagon has already pulled 3,000 troops out of Afghanistan this year. About 8,500 American troops remain in the country. 

Falwell to take indefinite leave of absence from Liberty Univ. » Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. will take an indefinite leave of absence from the school after posting a controversial photo on Instagram. 

The image, which he later deleted, showed him with his arm around his wife’s pregnant assistant—both of them with their midsections exposed and their pants partially unzipped. Falwell said they were posing just for fun but admitted he should not have posted it.

It was the latest in a series of controversies surrounding Falwell. 

At the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, experts and Liberty faculty members and students criticized Falwell for continuing to have classes on campus—though no cases were reported there through the end of the school year. In May, he tweeted an image of a mask with a racially offensive photo.

I’m Kent Covington. 

Straight ahead: COVID-19 restrictions and the First Amendment.

Plus, Kim Henderson on translating spouse speak.

This is The World and Everything in It.


MARY REICHARD: It’s Monday morning and a brand new work week for The World and Everything in It. Today is the 10th of August, 2020. 

Good morning to you, I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Today on Legal Docket, the economic shutdowns and conflicts with religious freedom.

With COVID-19 still an issue among us, some states continue with strict limits on gathering sizes in all kinds of contexts: from elevators to restaurants and bars to casinos to churches.

But officials haven’t evenly applied the regulations, or grappled with First Amendment protections in the U-S Constitution. 

And that’s causing problems.

Late last month, a split U-S Supreme Court rejected a request from a church to block enforcement of restrictions church leaders thought discriminatory. Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley in Nevada argued that casinos, restaurants, and amusement parks had more generous capacity limits than churches. 

The Supreme Court gave no explanation, not unusual for emergency applications.

REICHARD: The court also rejected a similar plea from a church in California in May, by the same 5-4 ruling. 

These skirmishes are going on around the country. 

The pastor of Grace Community Church, John MacArthur, has defied California’s regulations by conducting church services that include singing. That carries a potential fine of $1,000 per day. 

MacArthur believes the government is to protect civic order, but it cannot dictate “doctrine, practice, or polity of the church.” Here’s how he put it in a video message last updated on Thursday:

MACARTHUR: We’ve gotten affirmation from some pretty significant places. Some of the people that are significant in Washington want to come along and help us. Some people with legal expertise on the Constitution. So we don’t know what’s going to come in the future, but one thing we can promise you: we’re having church at Grace every Sunday.

Joining us now to talk about this is U.S. Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband. He leads the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice.

AAG Dreiband, welcome!

ERIC DREIBAND, GUEST: Well, Mary, thank you for having me.

REICHARD: The Civil Rights Division outlined some of the unequal treatment houses of worship have faced during the pandemic in a recent DOJ publication.  I just mentioned a couple of those. Can you talk about what else you’re seeing on this front?

DREIBAND: Well, Mary, we, we’ve seen quite a bit of activity in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. That several state and local governments have taken very aggressive action to try to address the pandemic by shutting down houses of worship, as well as other parts of our society and our economy, particularly when the shutdown orders happened in March and April, but continuing even to present day. 

The first case that we saw involving what we thought and still think raised the First Amendment protections for houses of worship was a case out of the state of Mississippi. And we filed papers in federal court there to protect the right of the people there to exercise their religion. And fortunately we were successful and that was back in early April. And we’ve continued on ever since.

REICHARD: I know back in April Attorney General William Barr released a statement on religious practice and social distancing. And around the same time you wrote an op-ed about this. What else is the Justice Department doing to ensure houses of worship know their rights?

DREIBAND: Well, you’re right. I did write an op-ed and made clear back in early April that there is no pandemic exception to the Bill of Rights. There is no exception in the First Amendment protections for religious freedom, for the right of all of us to exercise our religion, that continues during pandemic and that state and local governments cannot and should not infringe upon that. We have continued—both publicly and otherwise—to take action in federal court proceedings at every level of the federal courts when necessary to protect religious freedom. We’ve also spoken publicly and issued public statements in defense of religious freedom, and we will continue to do so.

REICHARD: At the outset I mentioned one California megachurch, Grace Community Church, has met the last two weeks despite state orders not to. So far authorities have not taken action against the church, except to send a cease and desist letter. But if the state does take more action against the church, would the Justice Department intervene on its behalf?

DREIBAND: Mary, I can’t comment on pending matters that are in front of the Justice Department, but here’s what I can say: is that it is certainly the case on the one hand that state and local governments have very broad authority to protect public health and safety. But on the other hand, state and local governments cannot violate the free exercise of religion protections contained in the First Amendment to the Constitution. And so what we do is as a general matter, as we look at what state and local governments are doing, we have a team of investigators and lawyers who are looking at this, who work scrutinizing everything that state and local governments are doing across the country, including in California. And when appropriate, we are taking action in court. And if there is some kind of discrimination going on against say a house of worship or people who are trying to exercise their religion, then we have taken action and we will continue to do that. 

And I know for example, in California, in particular, we became aware of concerns in May of this year, just about two and a half, three months ago. And I sent a letter to Governor Newsom along with all four United States attorneys in California expressing our concerns about the infringement of religious freedom and places of worship and their right to worship and be treated equally along with other nonreligious institutions. And so, for example, Mary, we highlighted to Governor Newsom and expressed concerns about the protections. The fact that restaurants, shopping malls, and offices could have gatherings, but houses of worship could not. We thought and still do that kind of limit on houses of worship, may have run afoul of the First Amendment to the Constitution. 

Fortunately, Governor Newsom and his team agreed with us. And so six days after we sent our letter, Governor Newsom modified the standards in California to permit greater attendance to places of worship. And so that’s what that’s all public, but mayors, governors, public health commissioners throughout the country should be on notice that we are and will continue as I say, to scrutinize what they are doing and to take action where appropriate.

REICHARD: You mention discrimination and unequal treatment. Those are legal terms. I wonder what you see as the root cause of the unequal treatment. Is it hostility toward religion? Ignorance of the law?  Something else?

DREIBAND: Well, I can’t say for sure, Mary, what motivates some people. I mean, I think there have been times when, you know, some people in our country are less supportive of religious freedom than others. That’s certainly true. 

But from our point of view, it doesn’t really matter what motivates these people. That is, state and local governments. If they violate the First Amendment, we don’t have to prove that they did so because they’re hostile to religion. All we have to do is demonstrate that what they are doing or what they are imposing on houses of worship or people of faith is inconsistent with what they are doing to other similar kinds of people or institutions. And if we can show that, whether they don’t understand the law or whether they don’t like houses of worship—doesn’t matter. And so that’s the approach we’ve taken. 

We have seen instances where public officials throughout the country at various times have favored non-religious gatherings in a significant way over religious gatherings and for whatever their motives are that simply is not permitted by the Constitution of the United States and the Justice Department will not tolerate that kind of action.

REICHARD: We have a lot of pastors and church-goers in our audience. If they are considering meeting again, what advice would you give them?

DREIBAND: Well, I think, you know, each situation is different. Different communities are facing different challenges with addressing the pandemic and a highly contagious deadly virus that is the so-called novel coronavirus. So I think they need to take account of for themselves and their communities, their health and safety and of them and their families. Certainly religious worship is important. It’s important to me personally, but it’s also important to the Justice Department, as a matter of protecting the rights that we have in this country. 

They should think about what is the legal status of matters in their town or their state in terms of what their options are and make the best judgment they can. It’s a difficult time for all of us in our country and across the world, really, but in a country that it was founded upon people fleeing oppression by governments and tyranny against religious faith it is critically important in my view that we continue here in this country to protect the right of all people to worship as they deem appropriate, within course respectful limits of health and safety to the extent possible.

REICHARD: Eric Dreiband is the U.S. Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice. Thank you for your time today.

DREIBAND: Thank you, Mary.


MARY REICHARD: Coming up next on The World and Everything in It: the Monday Moneybeat.

NICK EICHER: More Americans went back to work in July and that 1.8 million of our countrymen did so beat economists’ expectations of a number smaller than that. The number builds on net job growth in June and even May, so for three months more than 9 million jobs have returned.

Problem is, 22 million went away since COVID-19 arrived and the lockdowns began. In a sense you could say, the job losses suffered in late March and all of April wiped out 10 years of job creation. So of the 22 million jobs lost, we have 9 million back online and that’s 40 percent of the loss made up. So still a long way to go, but a meaningful start.

Here now to talk about it is financial analyst and advisor David Bahnsen. David, hope you’re well, good morning to you.

DAVID BAHNSEN, GUEST: Good morning. How are ya, Nick?

EICHER: Doing great, thanks for asking. Well, let’s talk July jobs. I know the number beat what labor economists thought, but I was cheering for more. Still, I guess it stands to reason that with the re-lockdowns, slightly better is better than worse. How do you view it?

BAHNSEN: Yeah, it was actually a lot better than was expected. I think that the more optimistic projections were closer to 1.4. And I also agree with you that with the sort of re-lockdown endeavors at a kind of half rate or three quarters rate that you might have seen in some states in the Sun Belt or the South.

So I think that the July number, they’re all in the category that we’ve talked about for so long, which is less bad than expected. And that is, of course, still bad. 

But I want to go back first, Nick, to something you said when you were setting this up about 10 years of job growth wiped away. I think that if you put into a spreadsheet the number of jobs that were created in 10 years and then in a spreadsheet the number of jobs that went away, that that may be true. But it isn’t true in any practical or real sense as long as those job losses at 70 or 80 percent categorized as temporary. 

Now, of course, the problem is A) temporary job loss is people aren’t getting paid and that’s awful and tragic for them and B) they may be wrong that it’s temporary. Some of those job losses may start off as temporary and become permanent, but I think to try to frame it as a comparison to the 10 years of job growth, there’s a real apples to oranges thing that is going on there. 

What is relevant and what is true is that the job losses have been severe and they’ve been awful for those people. But what I think we continue to learn as more and more data comes out is how incredibly true some of my theories have been throughout this that make it, from my mind, from a humanitarian standpoint worse not better. But economically is still important to sort of distinguish. So, you have this situation that becomes a little bit less profound in its economic impact but I think more profound in the human suffering because they’re people that can least afford to be without work and without income.

EICHER: Speaking of that, David, you wrote a letter to fellow financial professionals in New York City, urging them to get back into the city. You made the point that wealthy white collar workers are doing just fine working from home, but all the people around them—the service workers, the restaurants, the sandwich shops, the dry cleaners, they’re hurting because of all that working from home. You argued: We’re continuing to thrive, but by not reporting to work in Manhattan, we’re hurting people who really can’t afford to be hurt right now. Have you gotten any kind of response?

BAHNSEN: I have and at first there was quite a bit of response. But it isn’t that the humanitarian approach was like an angle, per se. You and I really believe it. It really is the essence of economics that there is an impact that goes beyond just what you can immediately see. And that in this case there’s sort of invisible hand dynamics that are not hurting entrenched and powerful people. 

They’re hurting people that are downstream that I have heard for years from corporate America how hugely important social responsibility now is to them. And they do a big support for BLM and they do a big support for LGBT and God forbid that they do anything in the fossil fuel industry. So they have their social corporate responsibility goals very well articulated and there is some of the most profound proclamation of their virtue that I have ever seen. Well, here’s a chance to do something incredibly socially responsible, to have the people who can safely return to work, it makes their own business even more optimal and efficient, but even apart from that—because they’re certainly surviving without it—they have a chance to have this impact to others within the community and the ecosystem that is urban America and they need to, I think, implement that after Labor Day, not waiting all the way to the end of the year. 

And I’m very hopeful that at least some will respond to that call because I think it’s a moral call and of course very good for the economy as well.

EICHER: We talked about the July employment report. Let’s talk about more current affairs—and that’s weekly claims for unemployment benefits and continuing jobless benefits. 

So 1.2 million new claims and continuing claims of just over 16 million. Probably well to remind the listener that before COVID continuing claims were in the neighborhood of 2 million and now we’re talking about 16 million. So, again to your point, we’re talking eight times that number and it’s just unbelievable on a human scale. 

I’ll add one other thing. The $600 per week unemployment bonus, I think, fully expired. Is it too early to say that that’s having an impact?

BAHNSEN: Yeah, it’s definitely too early because the data wouldn’t even be wiped in yet But what you saw was the initial jobless claims drop to the lowest level since COVID began, closer to 1.1 million, but still over a million, still very high. And then the continuous claims which at one point were at 25 million are now down to 16. So then you take the data and you look at the monthly jobs report and we have a labor force of about 164 million people in a population of 330 million. And obviously there’s plenty of kids and elderly and others that can’t work. I still think 164 million in a labor force is way too low. But either way, roughly 10.1 unemployment rate, that matches up. 

We have a few confirming data points that suggest that there’s somewhere between 15 and 18 million unemployed people in the country. And there’s more under-employed as well that maybe are working part time that want full time, but that number came down this month, too. So, I don’t have an exception to it, Nick. All the data points are less bad than expected and still bad.

EICHER: David Bahnsen, financial analyst and advisor. Always great to talk with you and we’ll catch you again next week. I really appreciate your service to us.

BAHNSEN: Thanks so much, Nick. Have a good one.


NICK EICHER: Today is Monday, August 10th. You’re listening to WORLD Radio and we’re really glad you are! Good morning. I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD: And I’m Mary Reichard. Coming next on The World and Everything in It: the WORLD History Book. Today, the five year anniversary of a deadly explosion in China. Plus, 75 years ago, the U.S. drops two atomic bombs on Japan.

But first, 85 years ago, the U.S. government commits to a financial safety net for the elderly. Here’s Paul Butler.

PAUL BUTLER, REPORTER: We begin today on August 14th, 1935:

ROOSEVELT: Today, a hope of many years’ standing is in large part fulfilled…

Surrounded by advisers, his wife, and political leaders, Franklin D. Roosevelt signs into law his New Deal domestic program known as the Social Security Act. 

ROOSEVELT: This social security measure gives at least some protection to 50 millions of our citizens who will reap direct benefits through unemployment compensation, through old-age pensions, and through increased services for the protection of children and the prevention of ill health.

The first two years of Roosevelt’s presidency were marked with banking and employment reforms—in hopes of promoting relief and recovery due to the Great Depression. 

Beginning in 1935, Roosevelt turns his attention to social problems. He unveils a handful of more controversial programs, including the Social Security Act.  

ROOSEVELT: We can never insure 100 percent of the population against 100 percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-stricken old age.

The act withstands two Supreme Court challenges, and over the next 30 years is amended 10 times by the U.S. government, dramatically growing the scope and level of benefits.

ROOSEVELT: It seems to me that if the Senate and the House of Representatives, in this long and arduous session, had done nothing more than pass this security Bill, Social Security Act, the session would be regarded as historic for all time.

According to the Social Security Administration 2020 Annual Report , the yearly cost of the 85-year old program now officially exceeds its income. The board projects that will be the case…indefinitely

The latest report also finds that Social Security will empty its trust funds by 2034. The board assures Americans: that doesn’t mean social security dies at that point. Unless Congress does something about it, Social Security will have to live within its means by lowering benefits to about 80 percent of current levels. 

Next, August 6th, 1945:

TRUMAN: A short time ago an American airplane dropped one bomb on Hiroshima, and destroyed its usefulness to the enemy. 

The detonation levels most of the Japanese port city. Seventy thousand people are instantly killed, with tens of thousands dying in the months and years following due to radiation poisoning and burns. 

TRUMAN: The Japanese began the war from the air at Pearl Harbor. They have been repaid many fold. And the end is not yet. 

Truman was good on that promise. Three days later, U.S. forces dropped a second nuclear bomb on Nagasaki, killing another 30-to-40,000. 

TRUMAN: Let there be no mistake; we shall completely destroy Japan’s power to make war.

Military leaders are already planning at least three additional nuclear attacks.

TRUMAN: It was to spare the Japanese people from utter destruction…If they do not now accept our terms they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth. 

On August 12th, 1945, after three days of debate, the Japanese emperor declares his intention to surrender—made official at the signing ceremony three weeks later on the deck of the U.S.S Missouri.

And finally, five years ago this week, on August 12th, 2015.

CNN NEWSCAST: This morning, horrific video pouring in of a series of catastrophic explosions in a major Chinese port city Wednesday…

A series of explosions rock the Port of Tianjin in China. 

AUDIO: [AMATEUR VIDEO FOOTAGE]

The first fireball lights up the night sky at about 11 p.m. Residents in the neighboring apartment complex begin filming the conflagration.

Then a second, much larger explosion: as nearly 800 tons of ammonium nitrate ignite. The blast kills more than 50 people. It levels buildings, shatters windows, and sets hundreds of fires.

AUDIO: [NEWSCAST COVERAGE]

The fires burn uncontrollably throughout the weekend, setting off eight additional explosions. One hundred four firefighters die battling the flames. 

Communist Party officials censor nearly all media coverage within the country. Social media posts are quickly deleted, and international coverage is blocked. Nearly 50 local officials and warehouse staff serve jail terms for unsafe practices and unlawful handling of toxic materials.

That’s this week’s WORLD History Book, I’m Paul Butler.


MARY REICHARD: Today is Monday, August 10th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Here’s World commentator Kim Henderson on the trials of marital communication.

KIM HENDERSON, COMMENTATOR: I have this sister-in-law who can hold her own in four languages. She would insist it’s really only three (one’s a different dialect of her native Chinese), but I know better. After all, it’s those tonal languages that linguists say are the hardest to learn. The kind in which a single syllable can have several different meanings based on the rising and falling pitch of the speaker’s voice. 

For example, a simple two letters, M-A, can be pronounced as maah, maah?, maah (deep), or maah!, with each sound having a different meaning. Mix them up and you could end up saying “the speckled mother scolds the horse.” 

Easy peasy, right?

Evidently the translation difficulty works both ways. Here’s a message I recently received from an eBay seller based in the Eastern Hemisphere: 

Dear Henderson,

Hope everything goes fine with you  This e-mail probably disturb you, But I’m concerning about your package status . As the shipping is free and realize it’s international mail post send by economy option  Hope you could really understand this . when you are receiving good conditional leave us positive feedback in Real 5 ★★★★★ stars  

Now, that’s about as funny as some of the research papers I’ve graded. But not all tonal language issues are humorous. Case in point: the tonal language used by the most curious of all people groups—spouses. In no sub-section of the human species is the use of rising and falling pitch more pronounced—or more readily translatable—than among husbands and wives.

Here’s a transcript from a closet conversation between two spouses who shall remain nameless. Each time it’s the same sentence, exact same words. But notice the importance of accent marks in Spouse Speak. 

“You want me to wear my blue jacket ?” Translation: It doesn’t say business casual on the invitation.

Or this one:

“You want me to wear my blue jacket?” Translation: I prefer the brown tweed.

And lastly:

You want me to wear my blue jacket?” Translation: You owe me.  

That’s why in closets and other tight spots couples really have to watch it—the derogatory use of diphthongs or whatever else is in their linguistic arsenal—because Miss Communication, the mother of all translation barriers, will come right on in without even knocking.  

So in the lingo of lovers, as in overseas eBay correspondence, it’s all about semantics. Who knows? Maybe that Rosetta Stone company will eventually put Spouse Speak and eBayese in its teaching line up along with Farsi. 

Until then, blue jacket wearers and online buyers will simply have to keep struggling. Blame it on that incident at Babel.

And while you’re at it, watch your tone.

I’m Kim Henderson.


NICK EICHER: Tomorrow: Prison chaplains are having a difficult time caring for inmates with the COVID-19 restrictions in place. We’ll find out how that’s affecting men and women who desperately need the gospel.

And, we’ll talk about the stalemate over stimulus legislation in Washington.

That and more tomorrow. 

I’m Nick Eicher.

MARY REICHARD: 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 reminds us that neither death nor life, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Hey, it’s a big day today: Happy Birthday to our founder Joel Belz!

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.

Like this story?

To hear a lot more like it, subscribe to The World and Everything in It via iTunes, Overcast, Stitcher, or Pocket Casts.

iTunes

Free

Overcast

Free

Stitcher

Free

Pocket Casts

(Requires a fee)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.