Organ donation versus abortion

What do organ donation and abortion have in common? More than you’d like to think.

First of all, they both end in the actual death of a living person, who was once knitted together in their mother’s womb (Psalm 139:13)

Secondly they are both performed without anaesthetic – of course ‘foetuses’ and people who are ‘brain dead’ don’t feel pain… or do they? Link Link

Thirdly they are very valuable to those removing their organs and killing them. “Today the transplant industry is a $20 billion per year business.” Link (quote is from page 2). Aborted foetuses are also apparently worth money to Planned Parenthood Link

No organ donation, or abortion were consented to by the victim, whether ‘informed’ consent in the case of organ donation, or by the so-called ‘foetus’ or baby.

They are both pushed for by society and doctors. In fact even the church is getting in on the act, calling for Christians to be organ donors, and that these are ‘sacrificial offerings’ – in total ignorance I’m sure, but human sacrifice is pretty much what organ donation amounts to. Link

Please help spread the word. Say NO to organ donation.

God Bless you

Lis

Advertisements

Organ donation will no longer be a “donation” in the United Kingdom

“My body, my choice!” cry the shrill feminists, as they rally to defend abortion (and destroy time-limits to it being carried out).

Anti-abortion activists also know that these women had a choice – they could have “kept their legs together” or used some kind of contraception. Ah, but contraception fails, the opposition cry! You still, ladies, had option one. You’re not animals, you can control yourselves, and NOT HAVE SEX!

*What?*

Outrageous!

Well now the same shrill brigade who defend the dismemberment of their unborn will need to think a bit further ahead. They will need to opt out of organ donation in the United Kingdom if they don’t want to be dismembered whilst alive themselves.

Yes, you heard me right – presumed consent is now wending its way through a deceived and deceiving political system which is so ignorant of the facts of organ donation (or evil, if it does know the truth) that it’s about to presume OWNERSHIP of your organs “after your death” – which we all know is a lie, because they must be taken before you die. (Link)

I thought it was a rather interesting point to juxtapose these two viewpoints. The women clamouring for the right to dismember their child, because it’s their body, and therefore their choice, and the now imminent law change which means that unless they have already decided (kept their legs closed) they could find themselves being dismembered for their organs.

What do you mean you didn’t opt out (of pregnancy; of organ donation)? You had the choice to (keep your legs together; to sign a piece of paper).

Shocking? Not in this evil world. Why on earth would you be surprised that this generation who would sacrifice their own living child on the altar of their selfish desire to “live their best life” would also contain those who would be happy sacrifice (for it is nothing short of an Aztec human sacrifice, the beating heart removed last) you or anyone else for an organ which will probably fail in the body of another.

#OPTOUT

#MYBODYMYCHOICE

#SayNoToPresumedConsent

My body, my choice – yet the government back the choice to kill the unborn, and the choice of doctors to take the organs of the living (killing them). What a sick society we live in.

Maranatha.

God Bless you

Lis

Organ Donation is proof you can scam an honest person

The other day I had a call from an Indian sounding lady who told me she was calling me on behalf of Tesco’s and Morrison’s supermarkets to tell me I’d won a £60 shopping voucher. Knowing that I had not entered any competition to receive this, my instincts told me this was a scam, and I told the woman so and hung up.

They say you can’t scam an honest person, but if I had been brought up to believe that beneficent corporations would ring me out of the blue to give me money, I might have been fooled. And so it is with organ donation. We have been lied to so completely, so comprehensively, for so long that the public actually believes absolute lies on the subject. Their ignorance is fostered deliberately in order to continue the scam – a criminal act against the people of this country! In fact of course, without our ignorance it could never take place at all.

person.jpg

This lady claims she has been told her baby will die when it is born, and so has decided to carry it to term to “donate its organs”. There is something very wrong with the whole story – I actually suspect it is a false or planted story (I hope so, because otherwise this woman has been deceived into allowing her child to be killed – vivisected – for its organs).

The story begins with an error:

A brave mother who’s unborn child has died in the womb will carry her baby to full term in order to donate their organs to another dying child.

Hayley Martin, 30, from Hull, East Yorkshire found out at her 20-week scan that her child will die during labour or within minutes of birth.

Ummm – which is it? Is it dead, or will it die at birth? Is this just sloppy journalism? I don’t know. Then more strangeness:

While doctors suggested she get a termination to avoid the trauma of birth, she has decided to take the pregnancy to term so their baby daughter’s organs can go to other newborns in desperate need of transplants. 

At 20 weeks it would be classed as a late-term abortion and would be “partial birth” – I don’t see how that is less traumatic! (Read: Abortion – the story that brought a class of teens to silence)

The article then says she will be induced “Christmas week” a month early (why on earth would you do that?!)

Then it gets very sad because this woman really does not know the truth about organ donation:

‘I also know there will be babies out there who could have a chance at life with Ava’s healthy organs. Why should two babies die if one can be saved?’

However, the stoic mother-of-three still gets upset when she thinks about losing her tot.

‘I try to be as honest as possible and have a rehearsed speech prepared, but at times I can’t help but to fall apart and cry – especially when strangers congratulate me in the supermarket or at the shops’ she said. 

The baby has to weigh a minimum of 5.5lbs to become an organ donor and the couple are still unsure about what their daughter will be able to donate, but think her heart valves, liver cells and pancreas are the likely candidates. 

Later in the article they promote the idea of starting a charity in their unborn daughter’s name:

The Martins are also planning on starting a charity project in Ava-Joy’s memory to help other families who decide to carry to term, despite a fatal diagnosis.

They want to raise awareness of fatal fetal conditions, and support families by creating ‘memory packs’ to help them capture every precious moment.

You can read the full story here: Link

Something doesn’t feel right about this article. The images of the sad-faced Mum are there – all too posed and perfect. I cannot imagine any mother wanting to share such a personal and painful decision before the day. It smacks of propaganda for the organ donation drive. I’ve written before about this here: Link

Either this is an absolutely tragic story, made worse by medical deception, or it’s a planted story to test, or garner the level of support there is to bring in a system which expects mothers to consider carrying children to term for their organs. Which, by the way is sick!

I’ll quote from my previous article linked above:

The fact is the debate has been opened – that is what the article was designed to do – to open the debate and get you thinking that this was a viable option, and to guage the public’s feelings on the issue.

This proposal will move forward unless we say a resounding no again and again. They have begun this with a debate in a national newspaper, next time the debate might be in parliament – will you even pay attention to the news to know about it? Will your MP do what you want, as your representative, if you do?

The public are being softened up for this to become policy at some point – when they’ve suggested it enough times, and you’ve stopped saying no.

Say NO to organ donation.

God Bless you

Lis

England takes a further step towards tyranny

Oh yes, you thought you lived in a free country? You thought you were born free? No, because the government is planning to introduce an opt-out organ donation system after all. No, I did not get a response from my MP – I reminded him about my letter, and got a stock response extolling the virtues of organ donation opt-out systems. I never had him down as a moron – I doubt he is, he is what my father would have called a knave. He is a social engineer who thinks that his opinions are of interest to his constituents, when in actual fact it’s supposed to be the other way around (because, Sonny Jim, you work for me). But I digress, I haven’t decided whether to pursue the matter through his office – there will be a consultation and I hope to get involved in some small way – the idea that the state thinks it owns your organs unless you claim them by opting out is abhorrent at the very least, unethical as standard (the modern way) and deceptive by design. Can’t get informed consent? No need – just presume consent.

I need to pray fervently about what action to take on this – I have said a lot, and I have a future, and a life to live. I have written much about this on an internet where free speech is not really safe any longer. Privacy is under threat, and to continue to speak up and speak out is a risk. I will continue if the LORD calls me to – because to disobey Him would be worse than any human harm that could come my way. But I also acknowledge that standing up now may be the thing He no longer wants me to do, and in which case, again to continue to speak would be to be disobedient. As a woman I have to acknowledge my place, and my role, and I’m not Boudicca!

So I’m going to share with you the highs and lows of this new system as unveiled by the evil Theresa May. Can you tell how I feel about this? The pain, the physical pain I felt last night when I came home to see the news – no words for it. No words. My heart was heavy, and my soul was deeply troubled.

So, quoting from this article: [My added comments in bold]

In her speech at the Conservative conference in Manchester, Mrs May said: ‘Our ability to help people who need transplants is limited by the number of organ donors. That is why last year 500 people died because a suitable organ was not available. So to address this challenge … we will change that system, shifting the balance of presumption in favour of organ donation, working on behalf of the most vulnerable.’ [No, Ms May, the most vulnerable are those who are deceived to think their organs are removed after they are cold, blue and dead.]

The devolved Welsh government changed the rules in December 2015 so doctors can assume all over-18s consent to be donors after their death [lies!] unless they have opted out. Relatives still have the right to object to a loved one’s organs being removed, but if they can’t be contacted a transplant will go ahead. [Those in my generation without children will not be protected – who will speak up to stop this for us, if we have not opted out? This makes those without family especially vulnerable, but who cares about them, Ms May?]

While doctors are happy, there are others sounding the alarm: The article continues:

Dr Chaand Nagpaul, chairman of the BMA council, said the plan for an opt-out system was ‘excellent news’ and that it ‘has the potential to save many lives’. [And murder many innocents, Dr Nagpaul]

But Peter Saunders, from the Christian Medical Fellowship, said: ‘Presumed consent is illiberal, unethical, unproven and unnecessary and is based on the false presumption that the organs of deceased people are the property of the state rather than the family. Furthermore there is no proof it increases organ donations.

‘Presumed consent legislation is based on the legal fiction that people who have done nothing – neither signed an opt-in nor an opt-out register – have deliberately chosen to donate their organs.’

You could say that Peter Saunders’ comments are a good sign (that they were published at all is a step forward). However, it was the comments section which gave me some real hope. When the first article was published yesterday I think only one out of the top ten comments was in favour – everyone else, even those on the organ donor register now, said they would opt out on principle. They object strongly to the presumption of state ownership of their bodies, their organs! Some of the comments are copied below:

top comment
This was the top comment yesterday
comment 2
Another top ten comment
top ten comment
Another top ten comment from yesterday’s article

It ought to be noted that the level of public enthusiasm for the opt out system can be seen in this screen grab of the government petition started a few months ago:

public opinion

And from today’s article (an update on yesterday’s one):

organs
A rather concerning comment!
organs 2
Huge cynicism towards this government grab
organs 3
And another fully awake individual telling it like it is

Those three were in the top ten comments on today’s article.

There is hope, but there needs to be action, and I don’t think it’s going to come from my complicit MP at this time. If you are in the UK, NOW is the time to take a moment to write to your MP and express your disquiet and disapproval of this legislation – let’s get it stopped before it’s too late.

Please also pray for me as I try to navigate the role God wants me to play (if any) in highlighting this issue in an ever more dangerous world. Thank you.

God Bless

Lis

 

Deception and brutal force

In Africa they believe that albinos have magical power. They believe that in order for this power to be in the body parts, they must be cut off while the person is alive.

muti.jpg

What does this remind you of? Oh yes, organ donation. Except that we in the west declare them dead before we cut out their beating hearts and put them in other people’s bodies.

If Africa is backward, we are deceptive, devious and equally evil.

God says: “Thou shallt not kill”

Organ donation is little more than Aztec human sacrifice. It is little more than African muti – murder, theft, deception and evil beyond comprehension. Yet people continue to support organ donation through ignorance. They are deceived.

I am, as yet, to hear back from my MP, or Dan Jarvis MP regarding the emails I sent them.

God Bless you

Lis

Of doctors and death

In the latest twist in the case of Charlie Gard it seems that yet again his parents have been thwarted in their attempts to take him to the US for treatment. I want to discuss a little about the rights of children, and how all this nasty debacle seems to have happened.

As things currently stand, while you are pregnant you have the right to abort/kill/murder/evict that child from your uterus (depending on your viewpoint). Currently a woman can do this without the consent of her partner, even though his sexual act with her involved her consent. Hmmm.

But once your child is born and REGISTERED (the crucial part is that fact) they are effectively owned by the state. Your rights as a parent end there. A child who is registered has rights which are separate from the parents. So if a parent is a Christian, and the state disapproves of the way the child is being raised the child can be taken away. This happened to a Norwegian couple not long ago.

Your rights as a parent do not extend to knowing that your child has been given contraception by their school while they are underage. Your rights as a parent do not extend to denying them transgender enabling treatments until they are adults. No, the state assumes the right to step in, and effectively destroy the child’s life by allowing such evil and stupidity to reign.

You, as a parent, have very few rights at all.

Oh, unless you’re one of the hundreds of parents in the UK involved in female genital mutilation (FGM) of your muslim or African daughters, then the state will just tell you it’s not a good thing, and your child will not be taken away, not protected, nor the parent prosecuted. Satan is the god of this world, in case you had a moment of surprise and wonder as to why this might be!

Another issue in this case is one a friend highlighted to me, and I think it’s worth mentioning. I was talking to him about this case of Charlie Gard, and he said that it’s important for doctors to take this court route to stop other parents questioning everything they do. My immediate reaction was to say that they MUST question everything – as doctors often get things wrong, and never know the patient like their family do.

I have not forgotten the surprise of my father’s hospital consultant when told that Dad was still happily chopping logs at aged 80. No doctor would expect that – they are mostly too young to have any real idea of the world let alone the lives of their patients when not presenting in a state of ill-health. Remember that 130,000 elderly a year are (and I’ll say ‘are’ because the Liverpool Care Pathway has never ceased to be used, but it has ceased to be named as that). Doctors who don’t know elderly patients are very happy to write them off as incapable of a life worth living. Doctors are killers! What with abortion, euthanasia (which is what the LCP was and is) and organ theft (murder). Doctors are killers. Tragic but true (and these are only direct examples, the drugs kill far more).

And that’s the other issue here. Apart from the fact that Great Ormond Street Hospital have some kind of desire to play god with this child’s life – their desire is clearly to decide his fate regardless of any treatment that another medical team CAN do for him – the arrogance is astounding! Apart from that fact is the dangerous issue of Charlie’s ‘rights’. If Charlie has rights which do not chime with his parents obvious pro-life views, then he clearly has a ‘right to death’ – a dangerous precedent. The courts, who do not know Charlie, nor love him, and the doctors who want to play god to ensure they are in charge, in control of this little life separate from his parents – they want to decide the rights of this child for DEATH! His parents want him to have a chance of LIFE!

So children’s rights are a gateway to all kinds of nastiness dressed up as ‘progress’ – whereas, in the main, parents love their children, and want them to live, and be healthy and cared for.

Lastly let me be clear that whilst the medical profession are the only people on earth allowed to claim they can cure cancer, they do so by promoting chemotherapy which kills 25% of patients, is ineffective in 97% of cancer cases, and has now been shown to spread cancer throughout the body. Doctors and pharmakeia are the work of the devil. Beware!

Go to God, or ask the devil?

Yet today I read of a case of a child with brain damage who has been healed quite spectacularly with simple hyperbaric oxygen therapy. After 40 sessions this little girl is almost back to 100%! Read more here: Link

Oxygen is a supplement – it’s a natural substance, and there’s no money in it for Big (P)harma. No wonder, as with hemp for cancer, they continue to want their very profitable treatments which kill to remain the ‘standard of care’ (death).

May God bless you this Shabbat. Praise YHWH for His goodness. Stay close to Him in these troubling and difficult times. And please pray for Charlie Gard and his parents who have fought so hard for his right to life!

Lis

My letter to my MP regarding organ donation opt out system

A note to you – would you please write to your MP and voice your concerns about this bill?

I wrote to my MP this morning, and thought I would share what I wrote to him with you.

Dear Mr Hancock,

I am writing to you with regard to a Private Members Bill which, I understand, is about to be presented in the House of Commons (according to this article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ health/article-4704718/My-new- lungs-don-t-work-more.html).

I have written urgently to Dan Jarvis MP, and now I am writing also to you, as my MP, to share my very great disquiet.

Informed consent is the basis for everything that is done in the way of treatment (and the withdrawal of treatment) within the NHS. However, no one has ever given informed consent to be an organ donor. Organ donation requires the donor to be alive when their organs are removed. They must still have full respiration, a beating heart etc. in order for their organs to be usable. There have been numerous cases of patients who heard doctors discuss the harvesting of their organs, and who regained consciousness and later fully recovered from their injuries. Those cases are chilling in themselves, but the plain matter of law is the matter of informed consent.

If the public do not understand that they will be alive, not cold and blue as they believe, when those organs are removed, then the continuation of the organ donor system as it stands now is based on deception!

I’ll give you an example that I also shared with Mr Jarvis:

I asked a couple of my friends whether they were on the organ donor register, and they both said no. I said to them, “Well don’t go on it.” They asked why, and I simply asked them ‘Would you like an anaesthetic when your organs are removed?” They said, “But why would I need one, I’d be dead?”

There you have the public’s understanding of organ donation in a nutshell.

Yet the government is now considering moving to an opt out system of presumed consent, which worse, not only denies most people who are ambivalent about the decision a choice, but will also ensure the continuation of the public’s ignorance of the facts of organ donation.

Let me reiterate – the public believe they will be dead in the common understanding of that word when their organs are removed. Doctors know that organs from the dead cannot be used, and so have invented new definitions of death in order to get these organs. How can this be anything other than deception, Mr Hancock?

I ask you to stand against this new bill, which I believe is a crime against the British people.

Yours sincerely

Mrs Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx

Having written to Dan Jarvis MP, and now Matthew Hancock MP, I will of course share any responses I recieve on this matter.

God Bless you

Lis