Lee Wilson's Blog

Jet Packs Part 2 Jetlev R200

2011-07-12T11:46:00.000-07:00

Last November I blogged about a real-life jet pack and I was pretty excited about it even though it was actually very large and was more like a small plane. I mean, really you certainly couldn't wear it on your back like a backpack as we've seen in James Bond movies. It was more like a personal plane without the protection of any covering or a parachute.

The reason it had to be that big is because of the fuel paradox or conundrum. Basically, a jet pack that runs on fuel like gas or oil would have to be very large in order to actually carry its own fuel. And that extra weight would need more fuel which would add its own extra weight. So the small ones were out of the question.

But now there's another jet pack called the Jetlev R200 that's a lot smaller and much more lightweight. It looks a lot like the ones in James Bond movies. The only catch is that you can only use it over water and it has a long pipe coming out of the back of it that goes into the water. It sucks the water in and uses it for propulsion and can get up to 22 miles per hour. I think it's very cool and can certainly see a market for it as entertainment on the water - like a jet ski that flies! But if you're not over water, you can't fly. Here's a quick video on it:

If you're really afraid to fly or don't like the TSA body inspections I guess you could use this for international flights over oceans but at 22 miles per hour that would be a really long trip and you're done for if a storm or hurricane comes up. So even though the two jet packs that are out are pretty cool, I'm still waiting on one that I can carry on my back and use to fly whenever I want. But if you want to get me a Jetlev R200 for Christmas or my birthday, I'll be one happy boy!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter.

Principal Sends Fifth Graders to Kill Copperhead

2011-05-12T12:43:00.000-07:00

This really happened. I'm not exaggerating and whatever quotes I make are exactly as I remember them.

A dry Arkansas summer hadn't yet given up the ghost as my fifth-grade year of school headed into late September. My class and I, along with the two classes below us, were enjoying recess without enough testosterone in our bodies to make us think twice about the sweat that caused our tee shirts to stick to our skin.

My friend Matt and I were headed over toward one of the trees on the playground. I don't remember what we were doing but it probably had something to do with a fort made of sticks and briers or hunting some sort of reptile. He and I had a reputation for not fearing the creepy crawlies so when we heard a girl's scream followed by, "Snake!" we ran over to get a look.

Our principal, Mr. Cagley, had come outside to help the teachers on recess duty that day and he had positioned himself between the growing crowd of students and the suspect - a copper colored snake that had the accompanying swollen cheeks to give away it's identity as an extremely venomous copper head.

Mr. Cagley looked around the group of students and then called out, "Matt, Lee are you here?" We stepped forward, chomping at the bit to have some involvement with the snake. It was at that moment that Mr. Cagley held his arms out and backed himself and the other students away from Matt and me before loudly saying, "The Bible says that men are supposed to protect women, so boys, go kill that snake!" By "boys" he was referring solely to Matt and me and we were the only "men" who went forward to protect anyone that day.

I slammed a big rock on the snake's copper head and Matt jumped on top of it. We took turns jumping on the rock until we were sure the snake was dead and then presented our kill to Mr. Cagley. Once he determined that his prepubescent assassins had neutralized the threat, he allowed all students to return to the remaining minutes of recess.

The ants came during the night and picked the snake clean until only bones and fangs remained. It was wicked awesome! Something drug the skeleton away and most of the playground patrons soon lost memory of that fateful day. It was shortly thereafter that Mr. Cagley forced Matt and me to integrate our boys-only playground club. Seems like Jennifer was the first girl to join up since she thought reptile hunting was fun for a few days. She later became Miss. Arkansas. I'm pretty sure Lori was a quick joiner as well since she road horses growing up and liked the outdoors. Do you two remember this?

And what of Mr. Cagley? Well if the event I described had happened in the present day, he would have probably been fired. The papers would have had a field day with making up titles to paint him as crazy and unfit for principal duties. And parents would have gossip material stockpiled for weeks as they repeated phrases like, "I can't imagine," and "those poor boys." But that's not what happened. I told my parents that Matt and I had killed a copper head at school at the direction of Mr. Cagley. Seems like that didn't get much of a reaction beyond a pushed out lower lip and head nodding. Maybe they thought I was "using my imagination." Or maybe the world of that day figured two ten-year old boys were quicker and more flexible than a principal in his fifties and therefore, more qualified to protect the playground. Whatever they thought, it just wasn't that big of a deal.

I remember (and have forgotten) many times at age eight riding my bike miles from my house on the air force base where we lived and taking my five-year old brother with me. Even my mother, who was overprotective as best I could tell, seemed cool with that. And we didn't even think about wearing helmets! We would have laughed at any kid who dared put one of those goofy looking things on his head (though I'm convinced that I might have avoided a couple of emergency room visits for stitches and ice if I had worn one).

Contrast that with my two sons who I hardly even let go out in our yard without being under a watchful eye. That makes me feel kind of sorry for them because I had a lot of great adventures as a boy. Even though I wouldn't think of sending my son to kill a copper head at that age, I'm glad Mr. Cagley sent Matt and me into battle against that poisonous pest. He was a great principal who I know cared deeply about the students. And if he hadn't sent me to slay that serpent I might not be the manly beast that I am today.

Plus I have this really cool story to blog about on my way to south Alabama. Thanks Mr. Cagley!

Follow Lee on Twitter and Facebook.

Theater Versus Film

2011-05-06T09:41:00.000-07:00

Yes, I know some of you are thinking, "Isn't it spelled 'theatre'?" Nope, not in English spoken in the United States where this blog resides. Not unless you want to start spelling "center" as "centre" and "liter" as "litre."

So now that we've gotten that out of the way, last night I was in the first show of a theater production. I guess I thought it'd be unlikely I'd ever type that last line because I haven't wanted to do theater. And many of the casting people and producers I know have a cautious eye toward people who do a lot of theater because they're afraid doing it teaches you to overact and be bigger than what is believable. In community theater it's okay sometimes because that's what's expected but on camera it can look cheesy and fake.

Like an L.A. producer friend of mine says, "Acting shouldn't look like acting. It should look like I've just walked in on a conversation, not a production." He would reference theater as what you didn't want to see on a screen because the audience wouldn't believe it and couldn't go into that almost mental trance that is called "suspension of disbelief."

Remember in the high school plays how people thought the folks on stage were doing a good job because they "projected" and were loud enough for the people in the back to hear them? Or because they put "energy" into every line? It's usually difficult to do that and actually sound real. Look at everyday life. Not everything you say is "high energy." Watch a big-screen movie with some A-List actors and you'll notice that some lines are said softly. Some are said with very little energy and some are said in a way that's pretty boring. And you certainly won't see all the movements and hand gestures of typical theater. Why? Because the situation doesn't call for it. Everyday life doesn't call for it.

So at first I was surprised when I accepted a part in a play that I hadn't auditioned for or sought. But I've started to look differently at theater itself. The project I'm on at the moment is classified as musical theater. Meaning that, as the lead, I sing a couple of duets with the female lead. That's certainly uncommon with modern film because, again, it shatters "suspension of disbelief." Real people don't just break out into song and dance accompanied by strangers who, though they're supposedly singing this song for the first time ever, know all the words and just happen to break out into some really good (hopefully) choreography.

I've started to think of the songs and the dialogue that the director asks me to say while looking at the audience as inner dialogue. The audience is hearing my thoughts or getting a sneak peak into my motivations. In film, like in real life, you don't always know who the bad guy is. In theater they just come right out and tell you sometimes even through a catchy little tune.

I've enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would. Despite the memorization, long rehearsals and an occasional temper-tantrum from the director that I haven't experienced in film or television (don't worry, it hasn't yet been directed at me...I don't think).

But I am enjoying it a lot. As the lady lead (I like that better than "female lead") and I were discussing last night after the show, it's like an outter-body experience. Unlike film, the director can't just call "cut" and do a retake. And there's not all those people looking live at your every move. The camera is cold and doesn't react to anything but an audience for a theatrical production is living and breathing. You almost have to put yourself in a trance to keep in character. You can't completely forget the audience since sometimes you have to wait to say your next line until laughter or applause dies down. Sometimes you have to focus on your acting partners and other times, like when you direct your words more in the direction of the audience, on only the scene itself.

In film, I often hold eye contact with my scene partner while we stand or sit very close to each other. Sometimes in theater, intimate conversations are had standing ten or fifteen feet away in order to keep from blocking other actors or just to give the stage a balanced look. That took some getting used to because my instincts from film tell me that I need to be lost in my scene partner's eyes except for occasional, natural glances away and we often become lost in each other while they move the camera here and there to get the shots they needs as we repeat the scene several times. Not so in theater. I've been "corrected" by the director a few times for getting lost on my partner during rehearsels (I still feel like that's a good thing). It works well on film and television because it's more real, but a theater audience can't move around like a camera.

So though I don't quite have my finger on it, I don't think of theater as simply a film on a stage. It's different than that. Is it as real looking as a quality film on a screen? Probably not. But it's still a disciplined art form when done by people who know what they're doing. Just because a line is said loudly doesn't mean it's, "good theater." A stage actor's job is still to come off as real as possible. I can't stand to hear a line that sounds fake and broadcasts that the actor is, well, acting. Nothing kills suspension of disbelief like that. So it's important to work on both volume and realism as best you can. They don't have to be completely mutually exclusive.

So to sum it up, I think an intelligent actor or actress can do both film and theater without being molded into one style over the other. A good actor/actress can adapt and know that in some ways it's like playing a different instrument. Just because you play guitar doesn't mean that you'll try to hold a piano sideways to play it. Of course, just because you can play guitar doesn't mean you can play the piano in the first place.

Follow Lee on Twitter and Facebook.

Deep Space Requires Deep Pockets

2011-04-15T17:29:00.000-07:00

Last night I watched a National Geographic show called, "The Edge of the Universe" narrated by Alec Baldwin. He did a really good job despite the fact that I kept picturing him making a joke out of some of the dialogue. But he didn't and it was really good.

One of the many interesting parts of the show was when a scientist said that NASA planned on sending another telescope into space that will be even stronger than the Hubble and would fly out even further so that they could see even deeper into space. It's called the James Webb Space Telescope and they plan to launch it in 2014.

I was instantly torn because I am fascinated by space, especially deep space, but at the same time I had to ask myself if spending the many millions of dollars required to do that was wise at this time when our nation is top heavy with debt and politicians who seem addicted to spending absurd amounts more than taken in.

I guess I just can't see spending such large amounts of taxpayer dollars on some neat pictures of space when we're so much in debt already. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the pictures but I can do without it for now if it means saving all that taxpayer money.

But anyway, I learned a lot about space. One of my favorite lines was when Alec said that the gold ring on my finger came from an exploding star. All minerals, in fact, are formed from an exploding star including those in our bodies. So I guess we're all stars. Sort of.

Maybe NASA could send a ship out there to get some of that gold in order to pay for the trip! Seriously though, I love NASA.

Follow Lee on Facebook

Find a Veterinarian

2011-01-17T20:12:00.000-08:00

This past summer we "rescued" a handsome boxer bulldog. He had been hit by a car and his owner had given him to the vet to be put to sleep saying that they didn't have time for him anyway. The veterinarian let the owner sign over his rights but then decided he wanted to save the dog rather than put him to sleep. He contacted us and asked if we would like to adopt him. We drove a few hours to where he was and instantly feel in love with this gentle but strong animal.

A few months later his life was again saved by a veterinarian. His stiched area began to get severly infected. He began to swell in his chest to the point that we took him to the local veterinary hosptial. The doctor seemed torn over whether he should go with surgery or antibiotics. He told us that the amount of anesthesia that would have to be given to our dog could kill him because they have to give him a lot to keep him from hurting and this type of surgery would be extremely difficult because a flap of skin had grown over the stiching. He decided on the antibiotics but warned us that the infection could come back after the dose. It did and he prescribed another round. This time the infection stayed away. A nutrition and health expert we know who is exceptionally good with animals told us that the anesthesia likely would have killed him and applauded what the veterinarian did.

So if you love your animal, make sure he/she is checked up on by a good veterinarian. Here's a website where you can find a veterinarian.

Is Marriage Communication Really that Important?

2011-01-14T10:27:00.000-08:00

Is communication as important in marriage as you keep hearing from well-meaning friends and pop culture? And is all communication helpful or can some of it actually harm a marriage or romantic relationship?

It seems that everywhere we turn we hear that all our marriage problems could be solved if we'd just "communicate." And that the "key" to every issue that could ever come up in marriage cowers at the very feet of "communication." Read the rest...

Great Article on Marriage By David Code

2011-01-07T17:36:00.001-08:00

David Code is a writer for HuffingtonPost.com and is an Episcopal minister. His article, The Real Reason Couples Divorce, raises some interesting points that will probably step on the toes of many of us.

He starts the article off by pointing to an interesting tidbit about rats: If a scientist places two rats on a metal grid and then passes an electric current through the grid, every time the rats feel an electric shock they will attack each other.

Likewise with humans, he says, life gets stressful, we instinctively pick a fight with our spouses.

He's right. When we're annoyed with the world around us, we'll often try to find someone to blame who we can lash out at. Even when it's someone who deserves a lot more from us. So calm down and ask yourself why you're really upset. Find your temper instead of losing it and enjoy being around someone who's on your side.

With that in mind, here's a great article by Joe Beam on marriage communication. It's a great reality check and strategy article for communicating with the one you love.

Don't Like Airport Body Scanners? Get Your Own Jetpack!

2010-11-21T21:46:00.000-08:00

Jetpacks! Yes, they're here! From James Bond to "G.I. Joe" to The Rocketeer we've been waiting for our own jetpack to take us into the air like a bird or even better, Superman. And it's finally here thanks to the Martin Aircraft Company.

And for only $100,000 you too can fly over the suckers in a traffic jam and avoid the choice between being groped or providing a peep show to get on an airplane. No more buying flight tickets, just strap your jetpack on and go when you're ready. Want a bird's eye view of the world? Well the dream is here. So when are you getting yours?

Several news sources have reported this over the past few days, but here's a link to the company selling jetpacks: http://www.martinjetpack.com/

How cool is that?! And just in time for Christmas.

Follow Lee on Twitter and Facebook.

Nervousness, Success and Jack Nicklaus

2010-06-24T10:33:00.000-07:00

I remember in college when I was preparing for my first golf tournament my golf coach told me that I needed to expect to be extremely nervous. He said that if I knew it was coming it would be easier to deal with. He was right about both claims. I was nervous before my first college golf tournament. Big time! But he was also right when he said that it would be better for me if I anticipated that I would feel nervous.

In my golf now, I still feel some so-called, "first-tee jitters." Not always but often. I also feel nervousness before an audition. I think it's fair to say that we all feel nervousness and anxiety about things that happen in life.

The great Jack Nicklaus was reportedly asked by a psychologist to diagram his thought process before he struck a putt in a professional tournament. Most people who follow golf know that Jack Nicklaus was probably the greatest pressure putter ever. If a lot was riding on the putt, the odds seemed to increase that Nicklaus would sink it.

Nicklaus described determining the break of the green, the distance, positioning his body, where he looked and other technical details. And the last thing that he supposedly thought before he struck the ball was that he didn't care if he made the putt or not.

Did you read that? The greatest pressure putter ever and the greatest major champion in history (he won more major tournaments than Tiger Woods as of today) said that he didn't care if he made the putt! That was supposedly his last thought before he moved the club back to hit the putt.

Obviously he did care. He cared enough to stop caring after he had maticulously prepared until there was nothing for him to do but take action. He was able to remove his emotions so that he could perform.

I've tried to do that. I'm pretty good at it with putting. With my driver, not so much. With auditions, I'm pretty good once the audition starts, but prior to that I am still trying to be like Jack.

So when you're struggling with your nerves, consider that Mr. Nicklaus cared enough to stop caring so that he could perform. And that might be the biggest and most overlooked key to his success. All the other guys cared too much.

The God of Deep Space

2009-09-23T08:24:00.000-07:00

Here's a deep space picture that has made it's way around the Internet. The picture was taken with the Hubble Telescope and it fascinates me like other things having to do with outer space.

Take a look:

Those bright things that look like stars are actually galaxies. There are thousands of them in this picture alone. Those galaxies contain billions of stars and with many of those stars there are solar systems like ours. Makes you feel kind of small doesn't it?

You see, the Hubble Telescope, if it could see farther than this picture, it could look into those galaxies to the solar systems and then see the planets, moons and stars. The space between those galaxies makes it look like they are very close to each other but that is certainly not the case. They are thousands, millions or billions of light years away from each other or more! And light travels at a speed of 186,000 miles per second meaning that in just one year, light travels nearly six trillion miles!

It's astonishing that the universe is so colossally enormous. There's really not a word to do it justice or convey the message. And we've only scratched the surface.

The universe contains an unthinkably high amount of matter and energy to simply spring from nothing as some choose to believe. It's a fairy tale to think it all came from nothing! Because what comes from nothingness is nothing. That is...without a supernatural power.

Just try to imagine the awesome power of God since He had to contain at least as much energy, light and mass as is in the universe in order to create it. In fact, the Bible says that He is so staggeringly powerful that He simply spoke...and it was.

If you'd like to study more on this, read "Is God Real?"

Follow Lee on Twitter and Facebook.

Marriage Forums

2009-08-05T11:14:00.001-07:00

I'd like to tell you about a new message forum for discussion of ways to strengthen our marriage relationships. There's also discussion for engaged couples and people who want to get married one day.

The forum address is http://www.marriagehelper.com/marriage_forums/index.php

Topics include:

Engaged Couples and Those Considering Marriage
Surviving an Affair
Anniversary Announcements and Celebrations
Raising Children
Keeping Romance Alive
Questions about Sex
Spice Things Up (Suggestions or questions on how to spice up married sex)

So visit the forums and register!

My Hero

2009-04-16T19:36:00.000-07:00

I should have put this up on Easter. I figure better a little late than never.

When I was a child, I wasn't allowed to use the Lord's name in vain. If I said, "My God" in any way that was not in reverence, I should expect a spanking, and a tough one at that.

To this day, I do not take God's name in vain. I still cringe with I hear others do it. I know it's nearly common language today. But not in my house. I think people forget that one of the 10 Commandments was, "You shall not take the name of the Lord God in vain." Part of the reason is my upbringing. But I'm no longer afraid of getting the back of my dad's hand. Now, it's out of reverence and awe at the Hero of heros. This video says why. Please watch. The music is wonderful so turn up the volume.

Follow Lee on Twitter and Facebook.

Was Jesus Really Meek and Mild?

2008-12-28T20:43:00.000-08:00

I've always heard from folks that Jesus was soft and gentle. Based on how folks presented Him, I often saw Him in my head as sitting in a church pew with His hands folded and head bowed. And when He would walk around it was slow and soft. He rarely said much and when He did He spoke very softly.

I want to tell you something: Jesus wasn't the meek and mild wimp that so many want to portray Him as being. For one thing, He was a carpenter. And in that day, carpentry took a LOT more muscle than it does today.

Carpenters then were using a variety of ways to hammer nails into wood and one of those ways was with a giant hammer like the kind you would see at old fairs to ring the bell. Very large hammers that required two hands. So He was very likely a muscle-bound, burly man simply because of His profession. Kind of like the guy on the wrapping for Brawny paper towels.

Furthermore, if you watch how He interacted with folks, He WAS in charge. He called the shots with the disciples. He told the pharisees they were "white washed tombs full of dead men's bones" which would have been unthinkable to say to such powerful and well-respected men. I don't know if you've ever noticed or not, but He ROUTINELY ordered people around. And they obeyed.

When it came time for Him to fulfill His destiny of dying for sinners, He did so with dignity. Carrying His own cross until physically He absolutely couldn't anymore (that's pretty strong willed and even stubborn if you ask me). And read how He handled Himself in the trial. He wasn't meek or mild. He responded sarcastically at times and spoke as the One in charge when He chose to speak. Sometimes He just flat out ignored their questions.

He made it a point that people knew His life wasn't taken away by anyone. He made sure we never thought He was overmanned or outmaneuvered by telling us that He GAVE His life away and that it was His choice.

And remember when He picked up the whip and ran those men out of the Temple? Doesn't sound so meek and mild to me. In fact, He was likely considered a "bad boy" in His day because He bucked the establishment. Would you want your daughter hanging out with a guy who kept company with prostitutes, thieves and drunks? Or would you think she liked bad boys for following this Jesus guy because He ran with the wrong crowd, had no respect for the religious establishment and even spoke disrespectfully to the Pharisaical priests?

As someone who majored in theology, I'd have to say that I think that calling Jesus Christ anything but strong willed is completely ignoring His biography. Jesus was an alpha male. Correction, He IS THE Alpha male. Society has attempted to feminize men and that's simply wrong. Men, be what God created you to be--a man! A man like Jesus.

Forum areas by church affiliation: Assemblies of God Forums, Baptist Forum, Catholic Forum, Christian Church Forum, Church of Christ Forum, Disciples of Christ Forum, Eastern Orthodox Forum, Lutheran Forum, Methodist Forum, Nazarene Forum, Pentecostal Forums, Presbyterian Forum, Seventh Day Adventist Forum (SDA)

Save Your Marriage

2008-11-11T09:41:00.000-08:00

It's possible you're reading this blog because of the title, "Save Your Marriage." Maybe it's your marriage that needs saving.

If it is, there is real hope. Joe Beam is a world-renown marriage expert who has been featured on The Montel Williams Show, Good Morning America, The Today Show, The Mike and Juliet Show and Focus on the Family Radio.

Obviously the reason he's been invited on those shows is because he knows what he's talking about and he has a record of saving marriages that appear hopeless. About 60 percent of the marriages he's saved through his intensive seminar have been couples who have been hurt by affairs.

Your problem might be that your spouse is having an affair. Or it might be another issue. Joe Beam's seminar can help. It can save your marriage! Please give this seminar serious consideration if your marriage is in trouble. You can receive more information by completing the short form at MarriageHelper.com.

If your marriage is NOT in trouble, please link to the MarriageHelper.com site to help more couples learn that there is hope and help.

-

Is God On Our Side?

2008-09-09T08:09:00.000-07:00

Today in devotional my friend Wade read the text on the battle of Jericho (Joshua 5:13-6:27). After he finished reading the story, someone pointed out a very interesting nuance of the following verses:

13 Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, "Are you for us or for our enemies?"
14 "Neither," he replied, "but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come."

The Commander was a messenger of the Lord (also called an angel). Some argue that He was actually Jesus who appeared in Old Testament days in human form and I tend to agree. Either way, the Commander of the army of the Lord said that He was on "Neither" side.

Someone brought attention to the fact the Commander said he was on "Neither" side because that seemingly odd statement escaped the rest of us. It puzzled us for a few minutes as we discussed it. How could God not be on the side of the Israelites who were His people? He had said He was their God and had brought them through terrible times. How could He possibly be neutral between His people and His enemies? It didn't make any sense. Then we read the footnotes (after someone else suggested something similar to this as well).

The footnote said, "Joshua and Israel must know their place--it is not that God is on their side; rather, they must fight God's battles."

I thought that was a brilliant and very helpful statement from the footnotes of the NIV Study Bible.

We are certainly supposed to fight on God's side. I've often heard people suggest that there's not a fight. That Christianity is somehow a neutral religion that doesn't take positions or stands. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jesus was not crucified because He didn't take stands. It was the very fact that He did take stands. Some of His extremely bold stands were claiming to be the Son of God, that the religious leaders of the day were "white-washed tombs" full of bones and that He could tear down the holy Temple and rebuild it in 3 days. He took strong stands and made enemies because of it.

But as the text demonstrates, it's up to us to fight the battles of God. His priorities come first and we must choose positions and convictions based on His stands. So rather than looking at it as God taking sides in politics, religion or other aspects of life we must focus on God's eternal Word that serves as truth in these matters. It seems fitting then to conclude that we are to stand on the truth rather than flattering ourselves into expecting the truth to stand with us. We can be wrong, God's truth cannot.

Like this blog? Please link to it.

Forum areas by church affiliation: Assemblies of God Forums, Baptist Forum, Catholic Forum, Christian Church Forum, Church of Christ Forum, Disciples of Christ Forum, Eastern Orthodox Forum, Lutheran Forum, Methodist Forum, Nazarene Forum, Pentecostal Forums, Presbyterian Forum, Seventh Day Adventist Forum (SDA)

The Divorce Ticker

2008-05-29T20:24:00.000-07:00

Did you know that divorce costs the American taxpayers at least $112 billion per year? That's according to an extensive study by economist Benjamin Scafidi.

MaritalProblems.com (a website owned by Love Path International) has a new tool for websites and blogs that promote marriage and family. It's called the divorce ticker and it shows the number of divorces that have happened in the United States so far this year. It's live, so you can actually see the numbers change on your screen (about every 44 seconds). In addition to raising awareness on the large number of divorces and broken homes happening all around us, the ticker provides two small links: one for people who are in troubled marriages and another for those who want to help them. Those links open in a new window so that people are not taken away from your blog or website.

Would you please consider adding the ticker to your blog? To get the code to copy and paste and to see a demo please go to MaritalProblems.com/number_of_divorces_ticker.php

To see an example of the divorce ticker, scroll down and look at the right column of this blog template.

No King in Israel

2008-04-18T09:55:00.000-07:00

Judges 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who is wise listens to counsel.

Proverbs 21:2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes..."

Those passages have been on my mind lately. I've certainly seen it prove true in my time on this spinning rock. People will do all kinds of sinful, wrong things and find ways to feel justified or even at peace about those things. I guess we could call it compartmentalized thinking or even sociopathic. But it's more of a journey than that.

It's interesting that, as I said in another article, I recall learning in a sales training session that people buy things based on their emotions. They emotionally want something so badly that they find a way to justify it rationally. It might not really be rational, and usually isn't, but it will give them that feeling of peace about what they want to do.

It might be for pride in buying a fancy new car we really can't afford. Or it might be buying pornography to embrace lust. Either way, the purchase is based on emotion and then justified rationally in some way so we'll feel good about it.

That's what Proverbs 21:2 is saying. We're intelligent enough creatures that we'll find ways to justify and rationalize anything we want to do or else we wouldn't do them. We'll find a way to make it right in our own eyes.

But you see, Judges 21:25 reveals something more disturbing about that desire when it says, "In those days, there was no king in Israel..."

I think there was a king! There were many kings in fact. Each man was his own king and easily justified doing whatever he wanted no matter who it hurt or how wrong it truly was. And when you are your own king, no one else has the right to tell you, the king that what you're doing is wrong. After all, you have rationalized what you've done and have your own royal approval for it.

But other folks might speak of another King, this one being the King of the universe. What should be done about Him?

Remember how I said we are intelligent creatures? I assure you we are even though we're certainly not always smart in using that intelligence. And we are also immensely complex. There are so many factors going on inside our heads they might as well be a Rubics Cube of thought combinations and influences.

So when a point comes to us that damages the royal status of the king we have made of ourselves, we dismiss it even though somewhere inside of us we know the implications. So we "shoot the messenger." Or we muddy the waters of the issue just to add another arrow to our imaginary arsenal of justification.

And, as with most dictators, we cannot have defection in our kingdom. If a few brave friends attempt to intervene to save us from ourselves, they're charged with treason against our throne. And like Stalin and Hitler, we will remove those who disagree. No one will question the king!

And so there we are in our world where the king with our same name and social security number gives royal decree to allow us to do what we want. Those other judgmental folks who used to be called brothers are so wicked for opposing me! How dare they! They will not question the king!

We might also compose a round table of knights who agree with the king we have put on the throne. That ought to shut up that tiny voice inside suggesting those judgmental low-lifes might be right about paying attention to the One claiming universal kinghood. So we asemble voices who agree that those others are wicked and judgmental. They also agree that the sins of the opposition muddy the water enough to distract. Even a technicality counts in the debate against yourself when you're wanting to justify something.

And whenever that tiny voice begins, "But that doesn't change the fact that....!" we silence and banish it by adding more knights to the round table. These knights don't just deflect the attention to those who questioned our own right to the throne of deciding right from wrong. They do something even worse. They tell us that the desire in question has the blessings of the universal King.

And for a time, that last voice of opposition inside our head is banished and we have enough justification to provide that numbing peace that cancels out all the other pesky thoughts and voices.

And there will be no king in Israel.

© 2008 Lee Wilson. All rights reserved.

Christian Forum areas by church affiliation: Assemblies of God Forums, Baptist Forum, Catholic Forum, Christian Church Forum, Church of Christ Forum, Disciples of Christ Forum, Eastern Orthodox Forum, Lutheran Forum, Methodist Forum, Nazarene Forum, Pentecostal Forums, Presbyterian Forum, Seventh Day Adventist Forum (SDA)

"House" Sees Abortion For What It Is

2007-09-19T06:56:00.000-07:00

Fox's hit show "House M.D." has been one I watch on increasing occasion. I have to be in the right mood to watch Hugh Laurie portray the clinically brilliant yet cynical Dr. House, but when I am the show is usually very intriguing and entertaining.

This past Thursday night I wasn't particularly in the mood to watch but something kept me watching despite what I thought was only an average beginning for the show.

The show typically begins with a short scene that sets up the medical mystery Dr. House will attempt to solve. In this case a woman appeared to have a stroke while taking pictures at a photo shoot. Though that didn't seem terribly mysterious or interesting to me at the time, I did not turn the channel.

As the show developed I realized that I had to see how it ended. You see, the woman who had the stroke was pregnant and supposedly the stroke was caused by her baby. The first recommendation of Dr. House was to "terminate the pregnancy." The mother, however, used a totally different terminology when she informed Dr. House that she wanted him to save her "baby" (instead of saying "the pregnancy").

As Dr. House discusses the case with his team of doctors he repeatedly calls the baby a "fetus" and even tells other doctors to stop saying "baby" so that they "don't get hopes up" seeing as how the "fetus" was at least two weeks from being able to survive outside of the mother's womb and thus was not "viable."

Dr. Lisa Cuddy continually wages war with Dr. House on this issue by not only reminding him that the patient has insisted that the doctors save her and her "baby" as well. When Dr. House attempts mocks her by calling the unborn child a "fetus" or even a "tad poll" Cuddy tells House that he has no right to dehumanize this "person." The eyes of Dr. House widen as he begins ranting about her bias and lack of rational thought because she's emotional about some "parasite." And again he says they should partial-birth abort the "fetus." Dr. Cuddy insists that the patient's wishes be respected.

Skip ahead to where the mother is now in a semi-comatose state and a machine is breathing for her. Dr. Cuddy stands alone in continuing to try to save the baby with House and his team refusing to make further attempts at saving the life of the baby. Cuddy then discovers something that could possibly change everything--a slight deformation in the baby's lungs that is likely causing the mother's body to react as it is. Surgery on the child could save both his life and his mother's. Dr. House will conduct this surgery assisted by Cuddy and other surgeons.

During the surgery the mother's heart stops and House is ready to abort the "problem" but Cuddy, screaming at House "No!" And then yells "clear!" After several repeated attempts the mother's heart begins beating again. Time is of major essence at this point and House looks down as they access the tiny patient inside of his mother. Just as House prepares to administer anesthesia to the baby, a tiny hand reaches up and squeezes his finger. Dr. House is clearly shaken by this event and stares at what is happening with a look of enlightenment. After several seconds Cuddy yells to House that he must move and do the surgery. House hesitates and then continues.

The baby is saved along with his mother. The show ends with House sitting alone at his home looking at his own had and clasping and unclasping it just as the baby did when he squeezed House's finger. The show then skips to the future as the mother picks up her baby son and hugs him.

A similar story happened in real life during surgery on a preborn baby. Time magazine published the story about surgeons preparing to do surgery on the child after having cut into the womb of his mother. The little guy reached out and held onto the finger of one of the surgeons and that picture was on the cover of Time.

One of the things I refuse to do is to go numb to the atrocity that is abortion. I've witnessed other humans become desensitized to what actually happens during that terrible event. Promoters of abortion have changed the words we use so that we have an easier time justifying what is actually legal in the western world. Instead of "kill" we say "abortion" or "terminate." And instead of saying "baby" they say "fetus." That way we don't have to give the child human status. We can pretend he's not a person. The word "fetus" is actually a Latin word. The definition of that word is "baby." So we use a dead language to fool people into killing a child. Terribly ironic I think.

And then in recent years we've gone a step further in the desensitization process. We've made "abortion" into a political issue. That way we can separate it from life or our own accountability. I've encountered Christians who refuse to discuss the issue because it's "political." Fascinating, don't you think, that we can take an issue and dismiss it to the world of politics so that we don't have to think about it or form an opinion.

I believe the Devil works in ways to deceive us. What's he sells, we wouldn't buy at face value so he's got to sugar coat it or distract us from what is actually happening. So Democrats call it "choice" and say they are protecting freedom by insuring a woman has the "right" to kill her child. And people actually vote for them. After all, "abortion," "fetus," and "choice" don't tell us what is really going on. They know we wouldn't stand for it if we knew what was actually happening.

Recently a new ultrasound technology has surfaced that has the ability to show a woman her baby in color with extremely clear details. She can see if her baby has hair yet or is smiling. She can see facial features and tiny finger nails. She can see movements almost as clearly as if the baby were in her arms (click here to learn more about this technology along with amazing pictures).

Pro-abortion groups such as Planned Pregnancy have stated opposition to women being required to see a real picture of their child before they make their final decision about "abortion." Sure, Planned Parenthood, as they call themselves, wants to use your tax dollars to further fund abortions and to encourage women to have them, but how dare anyone suggest we use far fewer tax dollars to show women what they are actually "terminating" or "aborting"? Planned Parenthood objects.

Why? Because they know sane women won't kill their own children. And once the binders are taken off and they see past those easier-to-swallow words like "abortion" and "terminate" they'll be able to actually see what is living inside of them is in fact a baby and not a "blob of tissue." Planned Parenthood knows what "choice" those women will be more likely to make.

And Planned Parenthood, just like the devil, would go out of business if people could clearly see the truth. So please, see the truth. Take off the blinders. House did.

The picture above was on the cover of TIME magazine and likely influenced the "House M.D." episode. This baby's mother chose in-womb surgery to help her baby but "choice" says it was her right to have this same baby killed. What does this picture say about life and the choices we are making?

If you like this article, please Digg it.

Funny Video by Ken Fox

2007-09-11T11:07:00.000-07:00

The video below was made by one of my best buddies--Ken Fox. He is attempting to get on a new reality show that pays a large cash prize to the winner. Each person who views it basically counts as a vote to get him on the show. So please take a look and forward it on if you think it's funny....and you will. The video is "tongue-in-cheek" and even sarcastic in places. He's a good guy who loves his family so take a look.

Another Day Older

2007-08-27T10:40:00.000-07:00

My little boy started kindergarten today. I still remember my first day of kindergarten, though it's much more foggy in my mind than today.

Last week he and I were in a music video that will be out soon and is by a wonderful singer and song writer. I would share her name, but I'm not sure she would want me to before the video is out. When it is out, I'll have it here with a link to her website because I have really come to appreciate her music. (Update, see the Turpentine video by Brandi Carlile)

My little boy was a little me in the video. A little girl portrayed the younger version of the artist performing the song. They played together and pretended to be us in flashbacks.

I remember thinking to myself, "When did I stop being the little version of me?" Adults used to tell me that time flies but it never did when we were driving to grandpa's or waiting on our pizza. Time has a sneaky way of only flying by when you look back at it.

This morning as I kissed him on the cheek and walked backwards from his new classroom where his teacher was getting started and hinting that it's time for parents to leave I began saying to myself, "He's just another day older. It's just one day."

But one day, as with time, only becomes months and years when you look back on it. This is one day that I will remember when he turns ten....or sixteen. When he pulls in the driveway with his music blaring or when he has his first girlfriend, I'll remember when I kissed his cheek as I left him to the care of his kindergarten teacher.

As a close mentor once told me, I don't trust anyone. I've come to see that is true. I don't like other people driving my car, using my laptop or wearing my clothes. And yet I entrusted my most valuable posession to someone I hardly know.

That's another thing about time. A baby step is just a baby step until you look at it from a later date. Funny...I remember when he took his first baby step.

Ok, have to stop writing now.

What? No Separation of Mosque and State?

2007-07-26T15:04:00.000-07:00

While some American schools rush to ban "Christmas" parties, cross necklesses and Bible clubs, others are going out of their way to allow and even promote Islam.

In San Diego, an elementary school added an extra recess for Muslim children to pray. The University of Michigan has gone so far as to provide facilities for Islamic students to wash their feet before prayer--all at taxpayer expense! In California, another school hosts a curriculum called "Becoming a Muslim" as part of world history class.

Can you imagine the outcry if any of those things happened with a Christian slant? Can you imagine if Christians were given an extra recess to pray? Or if a public college built a facility for Christian children to conduct a worship service? Or, perhaps most revealing of the double standard, if a public school offered a history class called, "Becoming a Christian"?

When the families of the seventh graders who had to take the "Becoming a Muslim" part of their history class sued the school for violating the ban on religious establishment, they lost. Sadly, this is all part of broader paranoia in America, in which people are more concerned about offending someone than they are about violating the law. Many in the Western World have become reverse pharisees in that some actually promote Islam in an effort to appear non-judgmental.

According to The Family Research Council, "The ACLU's silence on the matter exposes their anti-Christian agenda. The group, which is all too willing to sue when a Christian student prays silently, seems completely unfazed when another public school uses taxpayer dollars to ensure that Muslims can pray openly on school time during class. America may be the Mecca of diversity, but when it comes to certain schools promoting true religious tolerance, one thing's become clear--the Christian faith need not apply."

Read the USA Today Article for yourself and then check out these others.

UK: Primary School Students Issued Headscarf, Prayer Mat, Prayer Cap...

Muslims Seek Prayer Room at Airport in Minneapolis

San Diego School Gives Muslims Special Treatment

Are Public Schools Promoting Islam?

Reverse Phariseeism

2007-07-18T11:20:00.000-07:00

You've heard of reverse racism, right? That's when a group of people, a business, or college give special treatment to someone solely on the basis of them being black skinned or any other skin color but white. I don't know why it's called "reverse" racism because it's really just plain racism. There have been many cases where black children who grew up in wealthy homes were given government aid or scholarship directly from the college simply because of their black skin while white children who grew up in poor homes were rejected because of their white skin. If we're going to have government programs that pay for college tuition (or anything else for that matter), it should be based on economic situation and not skin color.

But that's another topic for another day of enlightenment from your's truly.

Today I'm talking about reverse phariseeism. Perhaps you've met someone who is a reverse phariseeist. The hit TV show "My Name is Earl" featured a reverse phariseeist. It was Earl's former mother-in-law. She stole his car and lost it gambling at a casino. Before Earl could even react she stuck a finger in his face and said the classic reverse phariseeist catch phrase, "Don't you judge me!"

You see the Pharisees were a religious group within Judaism during the time Jesus walked the earth. Not everything they did was bad, in fact, they did many good things. But one of their shortcomings was that they often made laws where God did not in an attempt to keep from violating the law that He did give. For example, God told the Jewish people in Exodus 20:10 not to work on the Sabbath day. Because plowing is work, plowing was not allowed. The law God gave was that people not work on the Sabbath day, but the Pharisees decided to make more laws to ensure that the initial law of not working was not violated.

One of the laws the Pharisees made was that a man with a peg leg could not walk on the Sabbath because if his artificial leg were to poke a hole in the ground and a seed happened to be blown into that hole by the wind then that man would be guilty of plowing and planting on the Sabbath and therefore guilty of "working" on the Sabbath.

So that is what phariseeism is and now I am going to tell you about reverse phariseeism.

Like reverse racism, reverse phariseeism is just as bad as regular phariseeism and truly is phariseeism. Reverse phariseeism is when someone who is trying not to be a Pharisee makes laws where God did not in order to keep from appearing like a Pharisee. For example, someone who is a Pharisee might notice that a Christian has not worshipped with the church in the last six months and tell that person that they have forsaken the assembly and are not really a Christian. Someone who is trying so hard not to be a Pharisee that they defect to reverse phariseeism would say that worshipping with the church doesn't really matter and that we have no right to suggest that it is important because that might offend those who don't go to church and they might think we are Pharisees.

You see, reverse phariseeism makes laws to prevent legalism (you catch the irony there, right?). It jumps to the other extreme and usually says that we should never, ever point out the wrongs of another person or group...unless they are a Pharisee and then you can stick your finger in their face and tell them they're going to Hell in a handbag. But if someone is a homosexual or divorcing their spouse, you have no right to tell that person that they are violating God's law and are in danger of being punished in Hell because the reverse Pharisee would call that "judgmental."

Someone who is not guilty of either of the "isms" but is merely trying to follow Jesus would note that the person is living a lifestyle that violates God's commands and tell them that with love and concern for their soul. The reverse Pharisee would not tell them at all and hope that the kindness he shows that person might make him one day want to ask if his lifestyle is wrong. But we all know that doesn't happen and so the reverse phariseeist is simply allowing that person to walk straight into Hell--all in the name of not "judging."

You see, as Christians, we know THE Judge. God is the Judge and has already told us how He's going to rule. So we are not to judge intent or thoughts, we are merely to state what God has already stated in an effort to save a few from forfeiting their souls.

The Bible tells us to do this in James 5:19-20: "...he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins."

Our culture can't stand anyone to suggest they might be wrong about something or in need of "salvation." It's not politically correct to suggest that any lifestyle is better or worse than another. But tell me, who cares more for the blind man unknowingly walking toward the cliff? Is it the one who walks beside him and just says kind things to him or is it the one doing whatever it takes, even if it's a little bit of shouting, to turn him in another direction and keep him from walking off the cliff to his death?

If you were blind, and I'm not saying that you are because that would just be judgmental, but if you were, who would you want to walk beside you if, by chance, you were walking toward a cliff?

That's what I thought.

Forum areas by church affiliation: Assemblies of God Forums, Baptist Forum, Catholic Forum, Christian Church Forum, Church of Christ Forum, Disciples of Christ Forum, Eastern Orthodox Forum, Lutheran Forum, Methodist Forum, Nazarene Forum, Pentecostal Forums, Presbyterian Forum, Seventh Day Adventist Forum (SDA)

Burned Out

2007-06-02T20:33:00.001-07:00

Note: This post was on my myspace blog and written during a work day a few weeks back.

Yesterday I read about a college football player who quit his team. He was a highly sought after player coming out of high school and had the elite programs recruiting him. As a freshmen, he saw time on the field and made some amazing hits.

I was excited about this guy because he played for my favorite team. But he quit because, as I've been told, he was "burned out" on football.

I can't blame him. I remember feeling the same way about football when I was in high school. I also felt it at times for basketball and golf because I had played them since I was so young that I can't even remember the first time I played any of them. I quit two of them my senior year of high school because I was simply burned out.

Burned out. What a phrase. When we say that are we saying it was the flame itself that burned up everything we had to give to something? Or was it that the very flame that led me to physically push myself simply had no more fuel to burn?

He'll look back in regret at being burned out just as I do. But it's odd because we can't live in the past, so even if we could go back and change it, we'd still be in the present. It would simply be a memory. And a memory is nothing more than a function in your brain that recreates the exact chemical composition you had at the moment of the memory. So when I "remember" I am basically just commanding my brain to create that chemical cocktail so I can relive an event that isn't happening right now. So we can live in the past, but only in our minds.

Some things in life only matter when they are in our minds. After all, our minds are the genesis for everything we do in life. But your mind cannot "produce" an experience. It can provide a memory of one as in the movie Total Recall where a company actually gave people the "memory" of a nice vacation so that they wouldn't have to take the time to actually experience it. In case you don't remember, in the movie, a company called Recall Incorporated provided Arnold's brain with the recipe for the chemicals that would make him think he had done something. And, according to the movie, if you think you did it, then you may as well have actually experienced it.

We can argue the philosophy of that concept all we want, but the bottom line is if it were possible to be given a fake memory, it wouldn't change the fact that the memory itself was not based on an actual experience. And, therefore, it wouldn't be an actual "memory" because there would be nothing to remember. And for me, that would remove the fun or sense of fulfillment that the "memory of a vacation" was supposed to provide Arnold and the imaginary people the movie presented.

That's why memories are important to us--they aren't fairy tales! They are events that belong to that recording mechanism in our minds given to us by God. They are history, not fantasy.

That's why he'll regret, as I, being burned out in the past. Because memories serve as the history for our lives and even if we want to feel good by saying that yesterday is gone and all that matters is today, we have a built in objection to that philosophy. The past does matter to us whether we want to be truthful with ourselves or not. It matters because we build on it. Because love can grow from having a history with someone. Because we learn from it. And because it helps us understand ourselves.

Sure, I look to the future. I am constantly growing, trying new things, feeling the excitement of coming experiences and trying not to judge the future by the past. At the same time I'm living for the present and trying to stay in the moment instead of looking down the future's winding road.

And now we're back to the answer that I continually find to be true--it's all about balance. And sometimes wild passion is a perfect balance just as occasionally boredom is a straight line on the pendulum. Balance keeps us renewed, refreshed and refocused. It is life's way of keeping us from being burned out on.......life itself.

Now if you'll excuse me (or not), I'm bored with this and am going to get the balance that can only be described as "fresh air." I'll probably through some football with some buddies, so if you are in cubical 2 or 5 I'll see you in a few minutes.

Using God as a Trump Card

2007-06-02T20:29:00.000-07:00

If you have never played Rook, a trump card is one that beats all the other cards. So we're clear on that.

It annoys me when someone tries to use God as a trump card. An example: "I know that this is right because God laid it on my heart." What can you say to that? Honestly?

I've known of an adulteress to say, "God just wants me to be happy." Or "God led me to this man, so I can't go back to my husband."

So God led you to break one of His commandments and the vow you made to your husband? Talk about self justification!

Then there are people who say that God laid it on their heart to do this or that as far as a business decision, what car to buy, school to attend, etc. And again, there's no arguing with them because in their minds you are arguing with God. So if their plan falls through, then was God wrong?

So the point is this--don't use God as a trump card. God gave us brains to think. That way we can make our own decisions without blaming Him when we make the wrong ones. Our mistakes are our mistakes. And no, God probably did not "lay that on your heart." Even the disciples had to toss dice to choose the replacement for Judas (see Acts 1) so I'm not convinced that you are on a more direct wave length to God than the disciples.

There, I said it.

Forum areas by church affiliation: Assemblies of God Forums, Baptist Forum, Catholic Forum, Christian Church Forum, Church of Christ Forum, Disciples of Christ Forum, Eastern Orthodox Forum, Lutheran Forum, Methodist Forum, Nazarene Forum, Pentecostal Forums, Presbyterian Forum, Seventh Day Adventist Forum (SDA)

Is this thing on?

2007-05-23T13:44:00.000-07:00

I've been through enough frustration trying to get my other blog address to work. Turns out I can't get into it.

So I'm starting fresh here.