Happy New Year!

I am so excited about 2017 – what a year 2016 was, and what God did for me in that time! With that in mind, I feel so buoyed up about 2017! I hope that 2017 is good for you, and that your needs are met, and your relationship with God is closer than ever by the end of it!

I’m just including a few of the best memes I’ve seen and grabbed off Twitter this last few months. I hope they make you think (Selah!) and inspire you.

aurelius
Think good thoughts (read the Word!)
cvynzkovuaanxr7-jpg-large
Be ready to act to protect others
cvpvzbdxgaqndy_-jpg-large
Take responsibility for your health
chalk
Realise that (p)harmacy doesn’t have the answer
warrior
Thank you for those standing up against Islam
flat-earth-memes-330-2
Be in awe
flat-earth
God’s word is TRUTH!
god-still-is
God answers prayer!
highway_vs_stairway
You cannot save everyone, but try
simple-life
Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS)

Please consider sharing articles from this blog – specifically on South Africa and on organ donation – these two subjects need a wider audience. Please pray for this to happen – you can help save lives!

God Bless you

Lis

Advertisements

The invisible sticking plaster of prayer

I wrote this a couple of months ago, and left it in my drafts folder. When the Elder emailed me again, and again didn’t respond to me, I felt it was time to brush it off, and post it. If you are in a church and you do this to people – if this is church policy, to pray and not ACT to help those in need, then SHAME ON YOU! I’ve had more care and support from online ministers I’ve never met than from a church just three short miles from where I live. I am blessed that God has improved my situation and my health, because I have done everything I could to LISTEN to Him. However, a parishoner in need is a parishoner in need. So here’s what I wrote in full (and unexpurgated).

I’m going to have a little rant, do excuse me. This is what occured to me when I wondered at the complete lack of ANY pastoral care from my local church.

“I’m going to sit at home and pray for you. I have emailed you and asked you how you are, that’s enough isn’t it? I’m not going to do anything practical. I’m not going to do anything face to face or physical. I’m not going to even tell you that I am thinking of you – I’m not even going to reply to your reply to me. No, I’m going to apply the invisible sticking plaster of prayer. And I’m applying it to myself, because your pain, your illness, your need is just too f****** real for me, and I cannot bear the thought that I could, or might need to rock up and show myself as a fellow member of the body of Christ and DO SOMETHING for you. Something practical – that I might have to put out my hand, or put my hand in my pocket for you. You can’t pay your bills? I’ll PRAY FOR YOU.”

Now, I’m not saying that God doesn’t hear those prayers. I’m not saying that heaven and earth cannot be moved by prayer, because thankfully God has been working all this pain for my good, and things are better than they were, but you know God does expect us to DO something.

Let’s take a real-life example. If you’re on the way to the shops and you see a homeless person, do you walk past them and ignore them and think ‘I’ll pray for them.’ Or do you give them some change, and have a chat with them – find out their story? Do you stop on the way back from the shop with food for them (if you’re worried that money might be all spent on booze)?

If you would walk past and pray for that person then you are like the majority of the Body of Christ – applying invisible sticking plasters of prayer to those in need, in fact to your own discomfort when faced with their need. Because to communicate with a person in pain is just too, well, uncomfortable for you.

Let me rip that off you now *rips*

OUCH!

Good – now think about what you could practically do for the person in need who you know in your congregation, while you have the chance to reach them – before they leave, as I just have.

Churches have opportunities to reach those who are struggling, alone and vulnerable. If that person is strong enough they will hold on by their finger tips awaiting a little inclusion, a little support.

If that doesn’t come, they will leave.

I don’t think I need to express why – but I know many who are not Christians who know better how to care for those in need than those in the church do.

/rant.

God Bless you

Lis

Ghoulish ‘ethicist’ wants euthanasia for coma patients, so that organs can be removed

Zoe Fritz.jpg
Zoe Fritz ‘ethicist’ and proponent of medical murder

Oh yes, she wants to push coma patients to the point where they can be declared dead and their organs removed  (vivisection). I quote: (source)

Hospital patients who are in a permanent coma should be given drugs to hasten their deaths so doctors can harvest their organs for transplants, a prominent hospital consultant said yesterday.

New laws should sweep aside the legal ban on euthanasia and allow the organs of those killed to be removed for transplant, Dr Zoe Fritz argued. […]

…Dr Fritz, a consultant physician at Cambridge University Hospitals, and a medical ethics academic at Warwick and Cambridge universities, said that where a patient is going to die ‘it could be in a patient’s best interests to actively end their life with a drug that would stop the heart both to minimise potential suffering and in order to be able to have vital organs donated.’

How, Dr Fritz, is it in the best interests of patients (in a coma, and therefore unable to CONSENT) to have any trace of hope removed that they might live, and oh by the way you’ll only die when we CUT OUT YOUR STILL BEATING HEART!?

Oh but it’s OK – she only wants to do this with patients who have expressed a previous desire to be an organ donor! From the same article I quote:

Dr Fritz said in her paper that instead of withdrawing nutrition and hydration, courts should be required to consider how a patient would have wished to die and their preferences on organ donation.

It added: ‘If the conclusion from this consideration – with appropriate safeguarding – is that they would wish their life to be actively ended facilitating the donation of their organs, then this should be respected.’

Well, phewee – I mean they’ve consented, right? No – consent requires INFORMED consent. No-one has ever given informed consent to be an organ donor.

Vital organs come from LIVING people, not dead bodies. What she is calling for is drugs to be used to cause a) brain death (a false definition of death), or b) cardiac death (another false definition of death, which can be declared in less than a minute in some US states). Then they intend to vivisect a LIVING human for their organs.

This is outrageous, and must never be allowed.

I commented, of course – let’s see if my comment gets published. This is what I said (while half asleep this morning!)

foofgcrop

Please share this post far and wide!

God Bless you

Lis

So what antidepressant was Steven on when he decided to become a woman?

I’ve covered this before, here: Link and I quote from an article I link there:

“The very first case I had like this in the early 1990’s from Prozac was a married family physician who had this reaction of changes in sexual orientation. He wanted me shouting this warning from the tops of the Rocky Mountains!”

Antidepressants are linked to changes in sexual orientation. How many children and adults are on these drugs and don’t know that that is why they suddenly feel the urge to change gender? Well here we have Steven, who now wants to be called Pamela:

transgender.jpg
Picture credit: Daily Mail

This story is presented as a right-on tale of a plucky wife facing her husband’s gender change by taking him shopping for ladies clothes. I quote: (Link)

“A transgender father has described the emotional moment he received his wife and children’s blessings to transition into a woman.

Steven Saunders, 55, broke down when he confessed to his wife and ‘soulmate’ Josie that he could no longer fight his urge to wear woman’s clothes.

But instead of being taken aback, Josie responded with unwavering compassion – and took her 6ft1in partner clothes shopping to buy women’s outfits.”

Let me repeat from the previous piece I wrote that suicide rates amongst transgender people is 41%. Why is society encouraging this? Why is the media writing glowing little pieces like this about Dad’s transition to being a woman, and how the kids are OK with it?

Let’s not be naive here – the devil is very busy messing with us – on all levels, from gender bending chemicals in the water (and even till receipts: Link), to antidepressants which are linked to transgender feelings – we need to stop encouraging this like we’re in some brave new age of enlightenment. It is wrong, and it’s unnatural, and this poor man is making a very serious error. It’s not his fault, and he needs our prayers, as do his family, but let’s not pretend this is normal, or it may become so…

God Bless you

Lis

The 6% – Medical researcher says ‘let’s take organs from euthanasia patients while they’re still alive!’

This is the ULTIMATE SICKNESS – it comes from shifting sands morality – moral relativism, which with each generation leads to deeper and deeper levels of savagery. Well this is peak savagery. I quote (Link) [my emphasis added, and my comments in square brackets]

Doctors should have the right to take organs from patients who want to die so they can be used in transplant surgery, a prominent medical researcher has suggested.

Those who want to be killed should be sedated [N.B. NOT ANAESTHETISED] in hospital then allowed to die after the removal of their vital organs, according to the proposal published by a British-based medical ethics journal. [allowed to die AFTER their organs are removed? Removing their organs will kill them!]

Using organs for transplant surgery from patients who have been helped to die is allowed in Belgium and Holland, the European countries where euthanasia is legal.

But ‘dead donor’ rules mean there must be a gap between the death of the patient and the removal of organs, with the delay meaning their quality may decline. [Nonsense – all organ donors are only ‘tested’ to see if they fulfill faulty criteria – brain death or cardiac death, they are never dead until their organs are removed]

However an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics yesterday advocated ‘heart-beating organ donation euthanasia’. This would involve an operation in which organs would be taken from still-living patients who have given permission.

It would allow those who wish to die to donate their organs while improving the chances of successful transplants, the article said.

The proposal by Jan Bollen, a researcher in Holland, drew condemnation from opponents of euthanasia and assisted suicide in Britain, where assisted dying remains illegal following an overwhelming vote against by MPs last year.

I am speechless – if you have seen anything about euthanasia in Holland, you know this is now happening to perfectly physically healthy people who are depressed. They are not interested in helping people with these problems, and goodness they certainly won’t go near a church with their problems, they go to a doctor and end up being USED like this? This is SICK! I am glad to say that Fiona Bruce, a UK MP has spoken out against this, citing serious ethical concerns. You can read her comments in the article linked above.

This is appalling, but still they are testing the waters – giving you step by step pointers until the next generation wonder why we held off so long from this sickness.

Please pray for Jan Bollen – this is an individual who has no true moral compass, and only God can preserve his or her soul from eternal separation from God.

If you haven’t come across the 6% before, read these articles – this is psychopathy dressed up as pragmatism.

The six percent – psychopaths in our midst

The 6% – putting it into perspective

The 6% – Animal cruelty

If you haven’t read my previous articles about organ donation, click the links below

Organ donation scandal – the truth about organ donation – MUST READ MUST SHARE

Organ donation and the myth of ‘informed consent’

Talking to my dear friend about organ donation

UK Transplant surgeon suggests babies with defects could be born for their organs

God Bless you

Lis

My email to Bishop James Newcome, Bishop of Carlisle, and his reply

Now that I have received a response from Bishop James Newcome, Bishop of Carlisle, I think I ought to share what I wrote to him, as well as his reply. This was my email to him:

Dear Sir,

Further to this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3449141/Giving-blood-donating-organs-Christian-s-duty-says-bishop.html and with great respect I must write to you with regard to your recent comments on organ donation.

Sadly the public are severely misinformed about organ donation, and I am including with this email some links for you to peruse. I believe once you read these, and pray about this you will see that this is NOT what God wants us to do with our bodies, and that we must resist organ donation as we resist abortion. Any surgical procedure which results in the death of the patient is not a Godly thing that He would approve of. It is indeed a sacrificial offering, but not one we should be encouraging anyone to agree to.

Quote from here: http://www.truthaboutorgandonation.com/factsaboutbeinganorgandonor.html

“BRAIN DEATH”- The new “Pretend Death” is not True Death

Prior to 1968 a person was declared dead only after their breathing and heart stopped for a determinate period of time. The current terminology “Brain Death” was unheard of.

When surgeons realized they had the capability of taking organs from one seemingly “close to death” person and implanting them into another person to keep the recipient alive longer, a “Pandora’s Box” was opened.

In the beginning, through trial and error, they discovered it was not possible to perform this “miraculous” surgery with organs taken from someone truly dead–even if the donor was without circulation for merely a few minutes – because organ damage occurs within a very brief time after circulation stops.     

To justify their experimental procedures it was necessary for them to come up with a solution which is how the term “Brain Death” was contrived.  To verify the determination of “brain death” they developed more than 30 different sets of criteria to declare “brain death” (DBD) published from 1968–1978. Every new set was less strict than previous sets–now there are many more.  Dear reader, those criteria are flawed.

Recently we read and heard about the young man in Oklahoma declared “brain dead,” but his cousin, a nurse, recognized response during the 4 hours of preparation to take his organs.  The transplant was not done.  This young man is living proof that “brain death” is not true death.  If his organs had been taken, he would have been killed.

He even attested to being able to hear and understand what was taking place but was unable to speak in his own defense as a result of his brain injury.  Most frighteningly, he could not cry out “STOP!” when it came to the harvesting of his own organs.  IMPORTANT: This is not an isolated case

More recently, when there is a desire to get organs while the donor still has obvious brain activity, a Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) is obtained to stop the life support. When the donor is pulseless for as short as 75 seconds (but the heart is still beating) the organs are taken – this is called Donation by Cardiac Death (DCD).  When a heart is taken for transplantation, after about 1 hour of operating, while the heart is beating and blood pressure and circulation are normal, the heart is stopped by the transplant surgeon. Then the surgeon lifts the heart from the donor’s chest.

Quote from here: http://www.organfacts.net/organdon/drdwevans/opposing-organ-donation/

“An authoritative view is that “Science cannot address the problem of consciousness” – though some Nobel Laureates have tried. Unless and until that changes, there can be no question of considering a brain dead while blood continues to circulate through it. How long, after the truly final cessation of all such blood flow, one must wait before deciding that a brain is dead is the question which requires scientific investigation for the provision of a reliable answer. It is, of course, a complex question requiring the consideration of variables such as prior nutrition, temperature, etc. My personal clinical observations suggest that (at ordinary temperatures) that period is greatly in excess of the waiting times currently in use for ‘DCD’ organ procurement. [I once resuscitated a neurologist after some 40 minutes of cardiac arrest – during which there was some ham-fisted chest compression/ventilation – and he returned to active consultant practice].”

Quote from here: http://www.organfacts.net/notdead/gloria-cruz/

“Tani begged doctors not to switch off her life support. A doctor, a social worker and a “patient advocate” rang him and again urged him to remove the ventilator and let her die. After two weeks Tani finally gave in to their demands but insisted that a breathing tube be inserted into Gloria’s mouth so that she could continue breathing on her own.

Just three days later, Gloria revived, awoke from her coma and was getting around Royal Darwin Hospital in a wheelchair. This was two months after doctors declared her dead. A doctor admitted that his prognosis was “wrong”. He reports that she is alert, mobile and on her way to recovery (May 2011).

Life Site News reports that an increasing number of experts have begun calling into question the “brain death” criteria for determining death. They argue that “brain death” is an arbitrary set of criteria developed largely to ensure the usability of organs harvested from such patients, as well as to decrease the medical costs involved in keeping “brain dead” patients alive on life support.”

And from my own blog: https://selahministriesblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/organ-donation-scandal-the-truth-about-organ-donation-must-read-must-share/

“It says ‘I want to help others to live after my death.’ What it doesn’t say is that you will be kept alive until your organs have been removed, even though you will be given no anaesthetic, and they may say you are ‘brain-dead’ but that definition has only been in existence since organ donation first became feasible.”

There is an excellent video at the end of that post which you may find extremely helpful.

I hope you will prayerfully consider what I have sent you, and that you will share your comments with me when you have read and watched the information provided. I believe I am one of very few who are trying to reach out with this important message, in order to prevent suffering and ultimately the deaths of those who cannot defend themselves. It is they who the church should be protecting.

God Bless you

Lis xxxxxxx

Today I received this response from Bishop Newcome:

Dear Ms xxxxxxx

Thank you for your e-mail and attachments about organ donation which I have read carefully.  I have to say that I (and  all the doctors I know) remain satisfied with ‘brain death’ as an adequate definition of being dead.  However, I am most grateful to you for your very proper concern, and for taking the trouble to write as you did.  Incidentally, my further thoughts on this are contained in a little book (published recently) called ‘At the End of the Day’.

With best wishes

+James

James Newcome

Bishop of Carlisle

I’m sad to say that I cannot see how this man is a man of God when the thought of someone being alive while their organs are removed does not move him to reverse his position. I publish his response because he is a public figure and prominent in the church in endorsing this stance. Christians rely on their leaders, and it is up to those of us who know to hold them to account for their huamn failings.

Doctors may well be satisfied with the current definition of brain death, but many anaesthetists are not – they are aware something is wrong, and I will continue to work to spread the message that organ donation does NOT happen after death.

I have sent the following brief response:

Dear Bishop,

Thank you for your reply – I would urge you to continue to seek God on this issue. God does not want us used as spare parts, and He certainly does not want us to be lied to to achieve it. Those on the organ donor register have NOT given informed consent to have their vital organs removed while still alive.

That is both a LEGAL crime, surely, and certainly a moral one.

Kind regards

xxxxxxxx

Please take a moment to pray for Bishop James Newcome – and ask God to reveal His truth to him.

God Bless you

Lis

Who sold us convenience?

Can you guess?

I think the devil himself did it, and I think it’s a ‘con’ – my reasons may amaze you a little.

I have written before about using cloth sanitary pads, and the difference they have made to my period. You can read the full post here: Link

So let’s just see the scenario play out. The devil wants to sell you something (because if you have to BUY it, then you, or in earlier times, your husband, would be wage slaves with no time to think and question).

So periods are horrible aren’t they? So let’s sell women the idea that disposable pads and tampons are SANITARY:

moldy tampon.jpg

Yeah, that looks sanitary (you can read the article about the ‘bread mold’ on tampons and the manufacturers stock response saying it’s safe, here: Link)

Ok, and then don’t worry about the moisture retaining gel in the pads, that’s a proprietary product and so you’ll just have to trust us when we say it’s safe… because we refuse to tell you what’s in it. (Link)

Oh, and don’t forget that the lovely soft SANITARY plastic the pad is enveloped in is a potent source of endocrine dusrupting chemicals – I mean putting that close to your hoohah CAN’T be bad for you can it? That part of a woman’s body is perfectly designed to absorb the chemicals leached from pad plastics and gel crystal-filled liners. It’s a very vascular area, and so highly likely to do just that.

Oh and they’re bleached you say? Mercola has this to say: (Link)

“Furthermore, to give tampons and pads that pristine, “clean” white look, the fibers used must be bleached. Chlorine is commonly used for this, which can create toxic dioxin and other disinfection-by-products (DBPs) such as trihalomethane. Studies show that dioxin collects in your fatty tissues, and according to a draft report by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), dioxin a serious public health threat that has no “safe” level of exposure! Published reports show that even low or trace levels of dioxins may be linked to:

Abnormal tissue growth in the abdomen and reproductive organs
Abnormal cell growth throughout the body
Immune system suppression
Hormonal and endocrine system disruption”

But they’re so convenient! Really?

I cannot get over the fact that with home made pads there is none of that funky smell that commercial pads give off.

I love that my period now finishes on time.

I love that my period is only about 60% of the volume it was – it’s so much lighter, it’s really noticeable.

So what could be better – sell women a product contaminated with chemicals (even glyphosate, these days: Link), that makes her bleed more (so she’ll need to use more pads), and which messes up her hormones so much she’ll be bleeding beyond five days.

Way-to-go! It’s perfect if you really want to enslave women.

And what’s more, I recently started looking into no-poo hair washing. I figure if the difference between home made pads and commercial ones can be so amazing, it’s got to be worth trying to get the chemicals off my hair too. From what I’ve read on other blogs – women who have gone no-poo for many years – it’s the very same system in place.

I think we’ve been had, ladies.

I’m impressed so far after just one wash, using bentonite clay and vinegar. I’ll keep you posted how I go on from there.

God Bless you

Lis