I am a self-proclaimed avacado-holic, cherished wife of Todd Snyder almost 23 years. Inside of Tiny Town, I’m the Chief Traffic Director and Hope Giver. “I dream it, he builds it and then I share it with the world!” We make a fantastic team! We build tiny homes and communities for families to thrive in for years to come. Our motto is, “Shrink your house, not your dreams”. We are blessed with three amazing kids: Elisabeth, 21, is studying nursing and getting married in June. Christianna, 20, is studying business and graphic design, living with family in Michigan. Andrew, 13, lives in the tiny house with us and when he’s not in school, he’s building tiny houses with his dad. Community info @ www.tinytowntexas.com.
My life mission is to dare people to believe the impossible is NOTHING with God! I’ve got some Big dreams I’ve been working on for twelve years. Watch them unfold in our blog.
My vision To be a part of a community of likeminded people working towards a common goal of creating and sustaining meaningful relationships that rock the world around you
Life motto He is my God; I trust Him
Favorite dreams quote “Your dreams should be so vivid that when you actually achieve them, you’ll feel as if you’ve already lived them.”
Favorite note “I can win with any hand I’m dealt” -God
Favorite songs I know my Redeemer Lives and Legacy
Life verse “To know Him and the power of His resurrection and to share in His sufferings, being made like Him” Phil. 3:14
My top values Leaving a legacy of Faith, Lots of intimacy with my husband, speaking life into my kids, spiritual and physical health, and friendships
From the legal eagle dream team on www.america’sfrontlinedoctors.com
Date: April 12, 2021
To: Whom It May Concern:
Re: Covid-19 Experimental Vaccine Candidates
Any compulsory Covid-19 vaccination requirement is a violation of federal law. I urge you to advise all students that they have the right to refuse or to take any COVID-19 vaccine. Any other action is contrary to federal law.
Covid-19 Vaccines are Experimental.
Covid-19 vaccines are not approved by the FDA. The Covid-19 vaccines are only approved under an Emergency Use Authorization, for investigational use only. Covid-19 vaccines lack requisite studies and are notapproved medical treatment. The FDA’s guidance on emergency use authorization of medical products requires the FDA to “ensure that recipients are informed to the extent practicable given the applicable circumstances … That they have the option to accept or refuse the EUA product …”
Title 21, Section 360bbb-3 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FD&C Act”) vests the Secretary of Health and Human Services with the permissive authority to grant Emergency Use Authorizations (“EUAs”) providing that appropriate conditions designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed: 1. that the Secretary has authorized the emergency use of the product; 2. of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and 3. of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks. 1
The right to avoid the imposition of human experimentation is fundamental, rooted in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, has been ratified by the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, and further codified in the United States Code of Federal Regulations. In addition to the United States regarding itself as bound by these provisions, these principles were adopted by the FDA in its regulations requiring the informed consent of human subjects for medical research. It is unlawful to conduct medical research, even in the case of an emergency, unless steps are taken to secure informed consent of all participants.
The following Emergency Use Authorizations have been issued for Covid-19 vaccinations:
12/11/20 Moderna – FDA issued an EUA for emergency use of the Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for recipients 16 years of age or older.
12/18/20 Pfizer/BioNTech – FDA issued an EUA for emergency use of the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine for recipients 18 years of age or older.
2/27/21 Johnson & Johnson – FDA issued an EUA for emergency use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine (aka Janssen vaccine) for recipients 18 years of age or older.
Each of the above EUAs was issued in conjunction with a similar Fact Sheet from the FDA. For example, the Janssen fact sheet contains the following notice:
“INFORMATION TO PROVIDE TO VACCINE RECIPIENTS/CAREGIVERS”
As the vaccination provider, you must communicate to the recipient or their caregiver, information consistent with the “Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers” (and provide a copy or direct the individual to the website to obtain the Fact Sheet) prior to the individual receiving the Janssen Covid-19 Vaccine, including: • FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Janssen Covid-19 Vaccine, which is not an FDA approved vaccine. • The recipient or their caregiver has the option to accept or refuse the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. • The significant known and potential risks and benefits of the Janssen Covid-19 Vaccine, and the extent to which such risks and benefits are unknown.
Clearly, any attempt to force anyone to take a Covid-19 vaccine is a violation of federal law and the conditions under which the Covid-19 vaccine has been authorized for use. The law is clear, experimental medical treatment cannot be mandated.
Businesses are not shielded from liability with experimental agents.
Under the 2005 PREP Act enacted by Congress, pharmaceutical companies that manufacture EUA vaccines are shielded from liability related to injuries and damages caused by their experimental agents. However, any employer, public school, or any other entity or personwho mandates experimental vaccines on any human being is not protected from liability for any resulting harm. While vaccine manufacturers may be shielded from liability, your institution is not protected, and neither are you.
You are hereby on notice that if you illegally or irresponsibly mandate EUA medical therapies on students, such as the experimental Covid-19 vaccine candidates, Imay have no choice but to take legal action, and you may be personally liable for resulting harm.
I urge your institution to comply with the FD&C Act and the terms of the EUA and its accompanying Fact Sheet, and to advise all employees of their right to accept or refuse any Covid-19 vaccine. Any other course of action is contrary to federal law.
Thank you for your time and for protecting the best interest of your students.
Bacon from the website www.america’sfrontlinedoctors.com and their legal eagle dream team
Date: April, 12, 2021
To Whom It May Concern:
I am sending you this notice, related to Organization’smask policy. My findings raise significant concerns, both medically and legally, of the current mask policy in place. Masks are ineffective for the purpose claimed by the mandate, potentially harmful, and only authorized for use by an EUA.
Masks are ineffective and in many ways they harm.
It’s a myth that masks prevent viruses from spreading. The overall evidence is clear: Standard cloth and surgical masks offer next to no protection against virus-sized particles or small aerosols. The size of a virus particle is much too small to be stopped by a surgical mask, cloth or bandana. A single virion of SARS-CoV-2 is about 60-140 nanometers or 0.1 microns. The pore size in a surgical mask is 200-1000x that size. Consider that the CDC website states, “surgical masks do not catch all harmful particles in smoke.” And that the size of smoke particles in a wildfire are ~0.5 microns which is 5x the size of the SARS-CoV-2 virus! Wearing a mask to prevent catching SARS-CoV-2, or similarly sized influenza, is like throwing sand at a chain-link fence: it doesn’t work. There has been one large randomized controlled trial that specifically examined whether masks protect their wearers from the coronavirus. This study found mask wearing “did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, the incidence of Sars-Cov-2-infection.”
Consider also, that the existence of more particles does not mean more virus. Research shows less virus does not mean less illness. Dr. Kevin Fennelly, a pulmonologist at the National Heart, Lung and Blood institute debunked the view that larger droplets are responsible for viral transmission. Fennelly wrote:
“current infection control policies are based on the premise that most respiratory infections are transmitted by large respiratory droplets- i.e., larger than 5 [microns] – produced by coughing and sneezing, …Unfortunately, that premise is wrong.”
Fennelly referenced a 1953 paper on anthrax that showed a single bacterial spore of about one micron was significantly more lethal than larger clumps of spores. Exposure to one virus particle is theoretically enough to cause infection and subsequent disease. This is not an alarming thought – it simply means what it has always meant, that our immune system protects us continually all our life.
There have been hundreds of mask studies related to influenza transmission done over several decades. It is a well-established fact that masks do not stop viruses. “Part of that evidence shows that cloth facemasks actually increase influenza-linked illness.”Bacteria are 50x larger than virus particles. As such, virus particles can enter through the mask pores, yet bacteria remain trapped inside of the mask, resulting in the mask-wearer continually exposed to the bacteria.
Related to the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, there was almost universal agreement among experts, that deaths were virtually never caused by the influenza virus itself but resulted directly from severe secondary pneumonia caused by well-known bacterial “pneumopathogens” that colonized the upper respiratory tract. Dr. Fauci and his National Institute of Health studied pandemics and epidemics and concluded, “the vast majority of influenza deaths resulted from secondary bacterial pneumonia.”
All parties mandating the use of facemasks are not only willfully ignoring established science but are engaging in what amounts to a clinical experimental trial. This conclusion is reached by the fact that facemask use and Covid-19 incidence are being reported in scientific opinion pieces promoted by the CDC and others. The fact is after reviewing ALL of the studies worldwide, the CDC found “no reduction in viral transmission with the use of face masks.”
Any intervention, especially one that is prophylactic, must cause fewer harms to the recipient than the infection. The cost-benefit of mandating an investigational face-covering with emerging safety issues is especially difficult to justify. Anthony Fauci was very clear that asymptomatic transmission was not a threat. He stated, “in all the history of respiratory-borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person.”
Wearing respirators come(s) with a host of physiological and psychological burdens. These can interfere with task performances and reduce work efficiency. These burdens can even be severe enough to cause life-threatening conditions if not ameliorated. Fifteen years ago, National Taiwan University Hospital concluded that the use of N-95 masks in healthcare workers caused them to experience hypoxemia, a low level of oxygen in the blood, and hypercapnia, an elevation in the blood’s carbon dioxide levels. Studies of simple surgical masks found significant reductions in blood oxygen as well. In one particular study, researchers measured blood oxygenation before and after surgeries in 53 surgeons. Researchers found the mask reduced the blood oxygen levels significantly, and the longer the duration of wearing the mask, the greater the drop in blood oxygen levels.
Moreover, people with cancer will be at a further risk from hypoxia, as cancer cells grow best in a bodily environment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes systemic inflammation which, in turn, promotes “the growth, invasion and spread of cancers.” Repeated episodes of low oxygen, known as intermittent hypoxia, also “causes atherosclerosis” and hence increases “all cardiovascular events” such as heart attacks, as well as adverse cerebral events like stroke.
Informed consent is required for investigational medical therapies.
Regardless of the lack of safety and efficacy behind the decision to require employees to wear a mask, it is illegal to mandate EUA approved investigational medical therapies without informed consent. Mask use for viral transmission prevention is authorized for Emergency Use only. Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA, means “the products are investigational and experimental” only. The statute granting the FDA the power to authorize a medical product of emergency use requires that the person being administered the unapproved product be advised of his or her right to refuse administration of the product. This statute further recognizes the well-settled doctrine that medical experiments, or “clinical research,” may not be performed on human subjects without the express, informed consent of the individual receiving treatment.
The right to avoid the imposition of human experimentation is fundamental, rooted in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, has been ratified by the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, and further codified in the United States Code of Federal Regulations. In addition to the Unites States regarding itself as bound by these provisions, these principles were adopted by the FDA in its regulations requiring the informed consent of human subjects for medical research. Add State info here if possible. The law is very clear; It is unlawful to conduct medical research (even in the case of emergency), unless steps taken to … secure informed consent of all participants.
Furthermore, by requiring employees to wear a mask, you are promoting the idea that the mask can prevent or treat a disease, which is an illegal deceptive practice. It is unlawful to advertise that a product or service can prevent…disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence… substantiating that the claims are true.
The FDA EUA for surgical and/or cloth masks explicitly states, “the labeling must not state or imply… that the [mask] is intended for antimicrobial or antiviral protection or related, or for use such as infection prevention or reduction.” As you can see from the image below, masks do not claim to keep out viruses.
Illegally mandating an investigational medical therapy generates liability.
There are proven microbial challenges as well as breathing difficulties that are created and exacerbated by extended mask-wearing.
Requiring employees to wear a mask sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19, and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, a mask may very well put us at an increased risk of infection, and if so, having a far worse outcome.
The fact that mask wearing presents a severe risk of harm to the wearer should – standing alone – not be required for employees, particularly given that we are not ill and have done nothing wrong that would warrant an infringement of our constitutional rights and bodily autonomy. Promoting use of a non-FDA approved, Emergency Use Authorized mask, is unwarranted and illegal. This mandate is in direct conflict with Section 360bbb-3€(1)(A)(ii)(I-III), which requires the wearer to be informed of the option to refuse the wearing of such “device.” Misrepresenting the use of a mask as being intended for antimicrobial or antiviral protection, and/or misrepresenting masks for use as infection prevention or reduction is a deceptive practice under the FTC. It is clear, there is no waiver of liability under deceptive practices, even under a state of emergency. As such, forcing employees to wear masks, or similarly forcing use any other non-FDA approved medical product without the wearer’s consent, is illegal and immoral.
This letter serves as official notice that I do not consent to being forced to wear a mask. I will not fail to take the maximum action permissible under the law against your organization, and against you personally. Accordingly, I urge you to comply with Federal and State law, and advise employees they have a right to refuse or wear a mask as a measure to prevent or reduce infection from Covid-19. Any other course of action is contrary to the law. I am willing to testify as to the veracity of the contents in this document. Please confirm no further pressure will be exerted upon me to follow this illegal mask mandate, and that I will not face any retaliatory disciplinary action.
From the website www.America’sfront linedoctors.com and their legal eagle Team
Date: April 12, 2021
To Whom It May Concern:
I am sending you this notice, on behalf of Family or Child Name. My findings raise significant concerns, both medically and legally, of the current mask policy in place. Masks are ineffective for the purpose claimed by the mandate, potentially harmful, and only authorized for use by an EUA.
Masks are ineffective and in many ways they harm.
It’s a myth that masks prevent viruses from spreading. The overall evidence is clear: Standard cloth and surgical masks offer next to no protection against virus-sized particles or small aerosols. The size of a virus particle is much too small to be stopped by a surgical mask, cloth or bandana. A single virion of SARS-CoV-2 is about 60-140 nanometers or 0.1 microns. The pore size in a surgical mask is 200-1000x that size. Consider that the CDC website states, “surgical masks do not catch all harmful particles in smoke.” And that the size of smoke particles in a wildfire are ~0.5 microns which is 5x the size of the SARS-CoV-2 virus! Wearing a mask to prevent catching SARS-CoV-2, or similarly sized influenza, is like throwing sand at a chain-link fence: it doesn’t work. There has been one large randomized controlled trial that specifically examined whether masks protect their wearers from the coronavirus. This study found mask wearing “did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, the incidence of Sars-Cov-2-infection.”
Consider also, that the existence of more particles does not mean more virus. Research shows less virus does not mean less illness. Dr. Kevin Fennelly, a pulmonologist at the National Heart, Lung and Blood institute debunked the view that larger droplets are responsible for viral transmission. Fennelly wrote:
“current infection control policies are based on the premise that most respiratory infections are transmitted by large respiratory droplets- i.e., larger than 5 [microns] – produced by coughing and sneezing, …Unfortunately, that premise is wrong.”
Fennelly referenced a 1953 paper on anthrax that showed a single bacterial spore of about one micron was significantly more lethal than larger clumps of spores. Exposure to one virus particle is theoretically enough to cause infection and subsequent disease. This is not an alarming thought – it simply means what it has always meant, that our immune system protects us continually all our life.
There have been hundreds of mask studies related to influenza transmission done over several decades. It is a well-established fact that masks do not stop viruses. “Part of that evidence shows that cloth facemasks actually increase influenza-linked illness.”Bacteria are 50x larger than virus particles. As such, virus particles can enter through the mask pores, yet bacteria remain trapped inside of the mask, resulting in the mask-wearer continually exposed to the bacteria.
Related to the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, there was almost universal agreement among experts, that deaths were virtually never caused by the influenza virus itself but resulted directly from severe secondary pneumonia caused by well-known bacterial “pneumopathogens” that colonized the upper respiratory tract. Dr. Fauci and his National Institute of Health studied pandemics and epidemics and concluded, “the vast majority of influenza deaths resulted from secondary bacterial pneumonia.”
All parties mandating the use of facemasks are not only willfully ignoring established science but are engaging in what amounts to a whole school clinical experimental trial. This conclusion is reached by the fact that facemask use and COVID-19 incidence are being reported in scientific opinion pieces promoted by the CDC and others. The fact is after reviewing ALL of the studies worldwide, the CDC found “no reduction in viral transmission with the use of face masks.”
Additionally, Children have been repeatedly shown not to be drivers of this contagion. It is well-accepted that children have a statistically zero chance of dying from COVID. The CDC shows the K-12 mortality rate from or with COVID is .00003. Any intervention, especially one that is prophylactic, must cause fewer harms to the recipient than the infection. Since children have the lowest death rate from COVID infection, the cost-benefit of requiring children to wear an investigational face-covering with emerging safety issues is especially difficult to justify. Anthony Fauci was very clear that asymptomatic transmission was not a threat. He stated, “in all the history of respiratory-borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person.”
Wearing respirators come(s) with a host of physiological and psychological burdens. These can interfere with task performances and reduce work efficiency. These burdens can even be severe enough to cause life-threatening conditions if not ameliorated. Fifteen years ago, National Taiwan University Hospital concluded that the use of N-95 masks in healthcare workers caused them to experience hypoxemia, a low level of oxygen in the blood, and hypercapnia, an elevation in the blood’s carbon dioxide levels. Studies of simple surgical masks found significant reductions in blood oxygen as well. In one particular study, researchers measured blood oxygenation before and after surgeries in 53 surgeons. Researchers found the mask reduced the blood oxygen levels significantly, and the longer the duration of wearing the mask, the greater the drop in blood oxygen levels.
Moreover, people with cancer, will be at a further risk from hypoxia, as cancer cells grow best in a bodily environment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes systemic inflammation which, in turn, promotes “the growth, invasion and spread of cancers.” Repeated episodes of low oxygen, known as intermittent hypoxia, also “causes atherosclerosis” and hence increases “all cardiovascular events” such as heart attacks, as well as adverse cerebral events like stroke.
Furthermore, the mandatory mouth mask in schools is a major threat to a child’s development. It ignores the essential needs of a growing child. The well-being of children and young people is highly dependent on the emotional connection with others. Masks create a threatening and unsafe environment, where emotional connection becomes difficult.
Informed consent is required for investigational medical therapies.
Regardless of the lack of safety and efficacy behind the decision to require a child to wear a mask, it is illegal to mandate EUA approved investigational medical therapies without informed consent. Mask use for viral transmission prevention is authorized for Emergency Use only. Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA, means “the products are investigational and experimental” only. The statute granting the FDA the power to authorize a medical product of emergency use requires that the person being administered the unapproved product be advised of his or her right to refuse administration of the product. This statute further recognizes the well-settled doctrine that medical experiments, or “clinical research,” may not be performed on human subjects without the express, informed consent of the individual receiving treatment.
The right to avoid the imposition of human experimentation is fundamental, rooted in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, has been ratified by the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, and further codified in the United States Code of Federal Regulations. In addition to the Unites States regarding itself as bound by these provisions, these principles were adopted by the FDA in its regulations requiring the informed consent of human subjects for medical research. Add State info here if possible. The law is very clear; It is unlawful to conduct medical research (even in the case of emergency), unless steps taken to … secure informed consent of all participants.
Furthermore, by requiring children to wear a mask, you are promoting the idea that the mask can prevent or treat a disease, which is an illegal deceptive practice. It is unlawful to advertise that a product or service can prevent…disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence… substantiating that the claims are true.
The FDA EUA for surgical and/or cloth masks explicitly states, “the labeling must not state or imply… that the [mask] is intended for antimicrobial or antiviral protection or related, or for use such as infection prevention or reduction.” As you can see from the image below, masks do not claim to keep out viruses.
Illegally mandating an investigational medical therapy generates liability.
There are no efficacy standards on child-sized masks and respirators under OSHA, but there are proven microbial challenges as well as breathing difficulties that are created and exacerbated by masking children.
Requiring children to wear a mask sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19, and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, a mask may very well put children at an increased risk of infection, and if so, having a far worse outcome.
The fact that mask wearing presents a severe risk of harm to the wearer should – standing alone – not be required for children, particularly given that these children are not ill and have done nothing wrong that would warrant an infringement of their constitutional rights and bodily autonomy. Promoting use of a non-FDA approved, Emergency Use Authorized mask, is unwarranted and illegal. This mandate is in direct conflict with Section 360bbb-3€(1)(A)(ii)(I-III), which requires the wearer to be informed of the option to refuse the wearing of such “device.” Misrepresenting the use of a mask as being intended for antimicrobial or antiviral protection, and/or misrepresenting masks for use as infection prevention or reduction is a deceptive practice under the FTC. It is clear, there is no waiver of liability under deceptive practices, even under a state of emergency. As such, forcing children to wear masks, or similarly forcing use any other non-FDA approved medical product without the child’s (or the child’s parental) consent, is illegal and immoral.
This letter serves as official notice that Child’s Name does not consent to being forced to wear a mask. Child’s Name advocates will not fail to take the maximum action permissible under the law against your organization, and against you personally. Accordingly, I urge you to comply with Federal and State law, and advise children they have a right to refuse or wear a mask as a measure to prevent or reduce infection from COVID-19. Any other course of action is contrary to the law. I am willing to testify as to the veracity of the contents in this document. Please confirm no further pressure will be exerted upon Child’s Name to follow this illegal mask mandate, and that Child’s Name will not face any retaliatory disciplinary action.
Just watched an excellent interview on the vaxxine designed to decimate the world population. A doctor who makes it very easy to understand. He is not anti vax just anti this one.
If link doesn’t work, Try a search for the website. “They” are messing with it.
Celebrating the parenting event my hubby and I navigated together successfully with our 15 Yr old son last week. It was our worst nightmare and I was able to step back, trust my husband and not make it worse. Our son made the best possible choice just 3 days later. Thanking and praising God for answering our prayers and for all the family who loves and prays for him and for us diligently and daily.
He’s more open with us and working to earn back our trust. We could tell he was relieved he didn’t have to Live in deceit and his behavior changed almost overnight from sulky, non communicative, shutting us out to happy and free again!
By keeping the relationship the most important thing and not inflating his actions, but showing him we are on his side and we Believe in him, we won his ??.
Me not jumping into masculine energy, but Trusting was another key.
I am working to be the observer and let my emotions rise up in my heart, feel the pain and release it. “The untethered soul” book has been a treasure!
The 12 month intense and not cheap relationship course we are in with Paul and Stacey Martino has helped us learn new skills this year for our marriage and our parenting. I highly recommend it. Learn more here:
On a funny note, our son admitted last week that he thought shampoo was just for girls after he started showering on his own until about age 13. Now I know why after he got out of the shower and his hair was greasy and I asked him did you wash your hair, he said yes. I assumed he was lying, but he thought washing his hair was getting it wet in the shower. A bit of a parenting and communication fail.
Another funny fail is when I found out the way he knows to clean his ears is when he can’t hear me well with his ear buds. ?
As lumber prices continue to soar, the cost is to build homes is rising with it and pricing many prospective home owners out of the market. The average price of a single-family home has risen more than $24,000, and many clients are having to walk away because they can’t afford the increase. This fast price escalation is having far-reaching consequences throughout the industry, and prohibiting home builders and partner organizations from providing much-needed housing to families across the country.
“Our tri-county service area has experienced a 55% decrease in home construction over the past two decades, despite our population growing by 5% each year,” observed Morgan Pfaff, executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Wisconsin River Area. “House prices have also grown 24% faster than wages in that same time frame, creating a serious housing shortage that most deeply impacts lower-income working families, but also harms local industry due to a growing inability to attract and retain a skilled workforce.”
“The rising price of lumber and scarcity of building materials has had a significant impact on our ability to address the housing crisis,” she added. “A home that was built in 2018 cost $11,300 to raise the walls; those same walls cost $17,074 two years later. This is a 66% increase, and will only further restrict our ability to provide safe, decent and affordable housing in our communities.”
Many Habitat for Humanity chapters are experiencing similar setbacks, not only in constructing homes, but providing critical repairs for the families who own these homes.
“Our Habitat affiliate is the only agency completing major repairs — roofs, furnace and septic system replacements — and installing wheelchair ramps in our service area,” shared Nancy Pellegrini, executive director of Habitat for Humanity Menominee River in Michigan. “We serve families that are at or below 60% area median income. Since the price increase of lumber, we have not been able to complete as many critical repairs as usual. We have also had numerous customers decline repairs due to the cost of materials.”
As nonprofits, Habitat for Humanity affiliates are doing their best to help bridge the gap through fundraising and additional financing.
“Luckily, we were able to access additional financing and a very generous gift in kind or we may have had to forego another year of home construction because of rising lumber prices, having already lost a year due to COVID shutdowns,” noted Virginia Ohler, executive director of West Tuality Habitat for Humanity in Oregon.
This is not a sustainable solution in the long run, however.
“Having to pay an additional $10,000 to $15,000 for material would price the families we are serving out of the market,” stated David Schreiber, construction manager for Stephens County Habitat for Humanity in Georgia. “The only solution is to raise additional money and gift the family anything over what they can afford, which is not a good solution because fundraising is difficult enough without having to explain some dollars would be gifted. We need donated material or subsidized material to continue our mission.”
I wasn’t scared of getting Covid and never wore a mask if I didn’t have to. The science proves they are harmful and do nothing to prevent the spread and it’s 100% unconstitutional! In fact, it does the opposite: weakens the immune system and actually increases the spread.
If you don’t believe me, please visit Americas frontline doctors .com
Now I want to know What are the vaxed transmitting to the non vaxed?
Why are gyms not excepting new patients who took the vaccine? Too much liability? What do they know that we don’t know?
I think it’s good every once in a while to remind ourselves of this covenant that was spoken over our nation by the earliest settlers. Let’s align ourselves with it and declare it over America. I understand this was one of the first prayers prayed on American soil and one of the first corporate covenants.
“We do hereby dedicate this land and ourselves to reach the people within these shores with the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to raise up godly generations after us and with these generations, take the Kingdom of God to all the earth. May this covenant of dedication remain to all generations as long as the earth remains and may this land, along with England, be evangelist to the world. May all who see this cross* remember what we have done here, and may those who come here to inhabit join us in this covenant and in this most noble work that the Holy Scriptures may be fulfilled.”
This verse haunts me at night, and I pray for my loved ones. It’s one of the most heart wrenching Scriptures. I expect we will be shocked at how many Christian Leaders and those who call themselves “Christians” will NOT be in Heaven! I do NOT want it to be you! Please reach out and let me help you know for certain you’re going to Heaven and you know the true Jesus. Many are deceived!
Jesus said, “Many will say to me, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? Have we not Cast out demons in your name? And He will say to them, ‘Depart from me; I NEVER knew you.”
