Tragic: Another man murdered for his organs – Bored Panda uses this for pro-donate propaganda

The family of Daniel Bassillo have recently shared their pride that their family member was vivisected for his organs, which are reputed to be helping other people. Their tragedy is now being used to further the cause of medical murder. Organ donation is firstly not a donation (because informed consent was not obtained), and secondly requires the victim to be alive when their organs are harvested – hence why it is medical murder.

I quote: (Link)

“We didn’t even hesitate when they asked us if we wanted to donate. I don’t even think we really had to talk about it,” Alexa told Bored Panda. “I pray that you don’t lose the most important person in your life but if you can at the very least take that and turn it into something good.. why wouldn’t you want to do that?” she added.

Why? Because if your brother had usable organs, he was still alive. Alive! He wasn’t dead when his organs were removed, and he may not even have been given an anaesthetic before he was cut open. Just horrifying!

The family showed online the letter they received, telling them how many people the doctors were able to help after they murdered her brother:

organs.jpg

I quote: (Link)

One cannot determine with certainty what organ donors feel, if anything, while being harvested. The logic of brain death goes like this: If the brain stem is dead, then the higher centers of the brain are also probably dead, and if the whole brain is 
dead, then everything beneath the brain stem is no longer relevant. Since in practice only the brain stem is routinely tested, the vast majority of the body, everything above the brain stem and everything below, no longer counts as human.

The reason for denying beating-heart cadavers anesthetic during the removal of their organs is hard to pin down. (Some experts say it is because anesthetic will harm the organs.) Nevertheless, administering anesthetics to BHCs during organ harvests is becoming more common in Europe, according to Robert Truog, professor of medical ethics, anesthesia, and pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. Despite their strong opposition to brain death, Truog and Shewmon both refuse to acknowledge the possibility that some donors may be in severe pain during organ harvests, even though they acknowledge that some donors did exhibit reactions similar to inadequately anesthetized surgical patients who afterward reported pain and consciousness. Shewmon said the donor reactions were simply “bodily reactions to noxious stimuli.” I asked if an experiment could be designed to answer the question of pain in donors. He said no.

Truog did not even want to discuss the possibility of pain in the organ donor. But when I suggested experiments along the lines suggested by other anesthesiologists—when BHCs show pain reactions during a harvest, administer anesthetic to see if the reactions subside—he surprised me by saying he had already done this. He has used two different kinds of anesthetics that do not harm organs to quell symptoms such as high blood pressure or heart rate. “Just because the symptoms come down, though,” he added, “does not mean the patient is in pain. Pain is a subjective thing.” As with Shewmon, I asked Truog if an experiment wasn’t called for. He said there was no experiment that could answer the question of pain in the donor.

Would Daniel have lived if he’d been kept on life support? Would he have recovered? We’ll never know. But we do know that this poor man was killed for his organs – that his heart was beating independently when he was being harvested. We know that this barbaric practice is shrowded in secrecy and that most people are ignorant of the truth of what organ “donation” entails.

Always say no to organ donation – do not “donate” or accept organs from murdered people for yourself or a family member. This secretive practice in which linguistic confabulation and misdirection is used to obtain “consent” for the abhorrent human sacrifice of one living person for other living people can only be stopped if we share that knowledge far and wide.

Your organs will not be taken AFTER your death, and Daniel Basillo’s organs were not, either.

I pray that he felt no pain.

May the fear of God bring you into all wisdom.

Lis

 

Advertisements

One Reality Ministry in terrible error

I watched a great video by this ministry recently. It was well put together, and I’ll even go so far as to share it here:

It’s pretty hard-hitting. I’ve watched it a couple of times, and a few other videos and enjoyed them. He quotes Matthew 7:23 and uses a translation which clearly states:

But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

Which is from the NLT.

I thought the ministry might get added to my Resources page. Until today.

Collin Retkowski who is the face of the ministry, talks in the video below, which I watched today, about being sinless. Being a sinless Christian.

He cites several people in the bible who were righteous before God (Job and Noah being just two), but sadly he makes the fundamental error, in spite of using Matthew 7:23 in other videos, of saying that the “ceremonial laws and the Mosaic Law” are done away with.

Nowhere does Yeshua say this – in fact this ministry is preaching the most dangerous doctrine of all – faith, plus works = salvation – without defining what those works are to be.

When we try to follow Christ and be like Him without reference to the Law, we tangle ourselves up in legalism. We define and redefine sin without reference to the Law which lays out for us so clearly what is sin! That’s what legalism is – the constant redefining of the law to allow us to do, or to restrict, things we think are right or wrong.

To give you an example straight out of the world today, of what legalism is, consider the speed limit. The sign says that the limit is 30 miles per hour. If we were to apply that as it is, which would be fair, we would say that travelling at 31 miles per hour is clearly breaking the law, so why don’t we? Why don’t people get a speeding fine for going at 31 mph? Because lawyers got involved, and said that, as speedometers are not accurate enough, it wouldn’t be fair, and so mostly our authorities only apply the speed limit allowing a 10% margin for error. This is legalism. One law wasn’t enough, so another rule must be added.

What most Christians think is sin is vastly removed from what the bible says is sin. In fact, he’s right that many Christians believe that feeling tempted is sinful, rather than waiting until you have sinned to feel bad.

But the simple aim of every believer should be a close, righteous walk with God – obedience is the ONLY answer to sin, because it clarifies what sin is! We can’t keep changing our minds because when we do, we begin a dangerous game – Collin says that Jesus will say in that day ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’, but then rejects the very law God gave us to keep us from sinning.

Please pray for Collin, because right now he’s in a dangerous place. He believes himself to be sinless, yet rejects the law, and this is an impossible place to be (and teach others from).

transgression

lawlessness

May the fear of God bring you into all wisdom.

Lis

Presented with comment…

As long as we’ve got our priorities right, eh?

priorities.jpg

Link

We have money for bombs, and we have money for stupid fripperies like this item above, but we do not have money to support the poor and sick – no, they must suffer.

May the fear of God bring you into all wisdom

Lis

Leftist Academic agenda alive and well at Cambridge

Yesterday I sent a very silly article about a very silly man to a friend of mine, commenting that I could imagine what my father would have said about this “academic” – he would have called him a “Fathead!” and then said that he had been “educated beyond his intellectual capacity.” I don’t think anyone would disagree with that:

Cambridge 1.jpg

Link

I quote:

‘I would lower the voting age to six, not 16, and I’m serious about that,’ he said. ‘I would want people who vote to be able to read, so I would exclude reception.

‘The old thing about voting for people like you wouldn’t happen, 9-year-olds aren’t going to elect 9-year-olds to Parliament and even if they did they’d be outvoted.

‘What’s the worst that could happen? At least it would be exciting, it would make elections more fun. ‘

Prof Runciman said the system of only allowing voting at 18 but having no cut-off point at the other end left young people vastly outnumbered.

He did not suggest stripping older people of their votes but said including young children was necessary to correct the ‘structural imbalance’.

What a total balloon! But where is the outrage? Where are the calls amongst his fellow academics to “burn the witch”? No, there are none, because in the intellectual vacuum of Cambridge University controversy is fine as long as it suits the general agenda of the Left.

When it doesn’t, then the calls for “burn the witch” are as shrill as can be, as in the case of this poor unfortunate fellow who has discovered that there is a link between race and intellect as well as race and criminality. This is not new, but 200 of his fellow intellectuals from as far away as Princeton are determined to destroy him:

Cambridge 2.jpg

Link

The phrase “ethically suspect” is particularly amusing and pertinent – it tells me that it’s unethical, in their minds, to even look at the issue. It’s only ethical to ignore the issues caused by “diversity” and not address them scientifically. Because they don’t like it they label him a eugenicist, which he may or may no be, and call his work “pseudoscience” which it is not. This is a subject which has been studied over and over and the conclusion is that there is a definite difference in intelligence between races, on average. But we mustn’t say so, or we will fall foul of the thought police.

I quote:

They said that they are ‘deeply concerned that racist pseudoscience is being legitimised through association with the University of Cambridge.’

They added: ‘This fellowship was awarded to Carl despite his attendance at, and public defence of, the discredited ‘London Conference on Intelligence’, where racist and pseudoscientific work has been regularly presented.

‘Carl’s work has already been used by extremist and far-right media outlets with the aim of stoking xenophobic and anti-immigrant rhetoric…this kind of pseudoscientific racism runs the serious risk of being used to justify policies that directly harm vulnerable populations.’

Yes, because immigrants are vulnerable, but the populations they join are not. The immigrants must be allowed to enter and destroy our countries (because destroy them they will) because otherwise it’s racist.

Take a look at Ethiopia:

tragic ethiopia.jpg

When Africans make Africa great they will be far more welcome here. The men of Africa should be at home building up their countries, but that is not the plan. As we know the plan is the Kalergi Plan: Kalergi plan – advertised, yet ignored by the masses

Remember folks, it’s not the immigrants fault in all this – our leaders are to blame. Diversity is our destruction, and intellectual rigour will not be applied unless you want to lose your career.

Lis

“Christians” again trying to tear down Torah followers for their “legalism”

This is a bit depressing, and I’m not going to go into the ins and outs of who said what. Suffice to say that amongst the videos shown to me on the side bar on Youtube I found a video which indicates that another ministry which has come to Torah has lost a lot of followers due to their stance. It’s bound to happen, but I want to highlight a comment that was made in response to one of these attack videos to show you the hypocrisy.

legalism struggle.jpg

Here’s the text in full with emphasis added:

“When I first started watching Lea, I really enjoyed her videos. She was on fire speaking against the New Age, one of my favorite subjects. She shot down drag queen story time, the women’s march, etc. I loved her passion. Somewhere things changed. They are now clearly teaching false doctrine. And the thing is, it’s not even about “who’s right?”. It’s about people. Because doctrine affects actual people. They don’t seem to understand that real people in real life struggle AGAINST legalism. I am one of them. For me, trying to follow the law is torturous and futile beyond description. It tears me down–as it should–because no one has ever been able to follow the law. Christ came to set the captives free. I hate to think that maybe they do realize this and actually want to lead people astray. I just don’t know…but one thing is for sure…demonic influence can be subtle and deceiving. Only God can see true motives. Thank you for your messages.”

I feel sorry for those who really believe this because what they are saying, (as they pick up their dog’s poop from the pavement to avoid a fine, file their taxes on time to avoid penalties and keep to the speed limit because “it’s the law”), is that they refuse to follow God’s Law. They can keep man’s laws (ever shifting, changing according to the whim of people) and do so every single day. There are few more law-abiding people than Christians. But they REFUSE to countenance keeping God’s Laws – Yeshua’s light yoke of Torah. Torah means instructions – it’s how to live a righteous and healthy life and have a good and healthy society. All of this is rejected, not based on the words of Christ, but on the misinterpreted words of Paul.

Success in keeping the law is not required for salvation, but let’s be clear, if:

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:19

can you tell me where the folks will be who say that all the law is done away with? There is nowhere beneath the least in heaven, is there? Yeshua tells us:

Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’ Matt 7:22-23

lawlessness.jpg

Finally, this all begs the question what exactly Christians are repenting of, and why? Sin is transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4), and so if you don’t study the Law how can you even know what you’ve done which is wrong in the eyes of God?

Repent, and obey.

God Bless you

Lis

The internet is rewiring your brain

This is a great short video – worth watching. Just as we pay attention to our diet, and believe we are “what we eat”, maybe we need to also think more carefully about how we consume the information on the internet, and more specifically how the way we use the internet either feeds into our ability to concentrate, or our distractibility.

I love the internet, but I’ve written before about the dangers both now and (more so) in the future. The internet allows me to study subjects to my heart’s content. But it also allows me to waste a lot of time being unproductive. Watch the video and then answer the question below. Please leave me a comment with your answer! Thanks.

So here’s my question: Did you manage to watch the whole video, giving it your full attention, or did you flip to another tab while it played, because you were distracted?

I was distracted to start with, then I tried to watch carefully, but my mind was thinking about other things as well. I found the video thought-provoking, and I hope you did too – at some point the internet will no longer be benign (if it ever was). Are you ready for that time? Have you thought about how you can gather hard copies of information for later use? Will you  be relying on online preparedness information when a crisis comes? Time to start buying books (if for no other reason than they haven’t figured out a way to retro-actively censor those!).

God Bless you

Lis

Man’s legalism leads to destruction

God has a way of doing things that He wants us to follow. He gave us written instructions on how to walk rightly before Him, but we exchanged His “light yoke” – Torah – for our own legal system.

Our legal system is built on leaven. Every little law contains within it more little nuances and regulations. Systems like this make lawyers lots of money as they seek to continually redefine these laws and their meaning and scope. It’s vital that we understand why this system is so toxic. It has enabled countries which once walked in a set of basic Christian tenets, if not the Law of God, to be manipulated until they (we) legalised things which God abhors. Homosexuality and abortion to name two.

And this system is ridden by those who seek our destruction.

Here’s a great and very relevant example of what I mean:

legalism.jpg

In case the image isn’t loading for you, the gist of it is “Migrants traveling to US sue Trump, government; claim violation of constitutional rights.”

Ok, so let’s just take a moment and examine this. Who is suing the government? Not the migrants, but lawyers. Not one of those migrants, I would guess, is qualified and knowledgeable enough to launch their own legal proceedings against the US government (I couldn’t do it, and I bet you couldn’t either). They have been advised by a group of lawyers who are, at a guess, left-wing, and, based on their desires, they are going to help non-US citizens to sue under the notion that they even have constitutional rights. Only American citizens have those, surely?

Only a system which is based on legalism and leaven could allow such an attempt to subvert the rule of law in the United States.

Only a system which is based on “loopholes” and “precedent” could create such a situation.

This will hopefully get thrown out, but the concern is that it will spawn more and more cases similar, and perhaps all it will take is for one judge to hear the case and the floodgates may be opened.

We need to acknowledge the absolute righteousness of God’s Law so that in our hearts we know right from wrong, even as we must live, obediently, in societies which go against that Law.

God Bless you

Lis