doG

No, it's not sufficient enough. Just because religion wants to come along and make the ceremony religious does not mean religion should get to have the institution of marriage all to itself. Marriage existed before the church just like Yule existed before Christmas. Religion needs to quit hijacking existing traditions and trying to call them religious traditions. Marriage already is and always has been a civil union. It is already a union carried out by Judges and Justices of the Peace whom cannot perform religious ceremonies as acts of government. That churches also carry them out does not make them solely religious. The church needs to quit claiming that which was not the church's to begin with!

See http://www.geometryatlas.com/entries/352

Barcodes are just a font like Arial, Times New Roman, Courier, etc. You need to obtain the GS1-128 barcode font from the vendor of your choice, install it and then use it in your document like any other font.

Then he/she/it needs to show up to testify at your trial. Trials are about evidence and there's zero evidence that any god exists so it should not be an acceptable motive in a court of law.

Proof please?

Why have sights at all then? With the gun upright you could just use the top of the barrel. Just pretend there's no such.thing as gravity.

I enjoy this but it isn't rooted in the belief of any deities. For me it is my belief as a humanist.

But if we could convince all of them to actually try to physically do something, to take real action to make things better for themselves and others instead of just praying for it to get better then things might actually get better.

If you are just looking for homonyms it sounds like you really don't need to encode the characters of a word but it's phonemes. Words with multiple pronunciations will probably need to have multiple entries in your database, one for each pronunciation. You may need to encode both though, the characters and the phonemes depending on what you are trying to achieve.

Yes, it's possible that they could be an agnostic atheist but for the sake of clarity I will point out that those that doubt the existence of god(s) are atheist, i.e. not-theist. True, they may also have the belief that man can never know the absolute truth and that would make them agnostic as well but simply doubting the existence of god(s) says nothing about an individual being agnostic or not since agnosticism is not a point on the axis of theism. You'd make a good game show contestant...

Your musings look European oriented. Where are you? Here in the U.S., as DH has pointed out, privacy concerns are usually driven by the left wing.

That could be a godsend

Yes they are. The consensus among biblical scholars is that there is little or no first person testimony in the bible. People should look into this themselves and not take anyone's word that the books of the bible are evidence of anything unless they can dig up supporting evidence. Commentaries may make nice reading material but they are really just commentaries about hearsay stories so they'd be a waste of time to evaluate the books of the bible as actual evidence.

Just because a thing is a thing does not make it evidence. The bible is a thing and you could say it is evidence that there are such things as books. It is not evidence of a supernatural entity or deity. A rock is also a thing and you could say it is evidence that rocks exist. You could not say it is evidence of the existence of books though.

What defintions? Documents from the bible are hearsay stories, not testimony. They are not evidence. I have already posted previously that even the 4 gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are not testimony. They are hearsay. Hearsay is not testimony and it is not evidence because it cannot be presumed true and has not been proven true with other evidence. The bible is a collection of story books written over centuries, nothing more. It is not evidence of anything.

Please quit posting fables and calling them evidence. Please see the previous discussion here on evidence.

NOPE! Your interpretations of the bible are not evidence of anything, they are simply your opinion. The bible itself is not evidence of anything either.

It's as possible as proving that Xenu doesn't exist.

Yes but....morse does not distinguish between upper and lower case so the person John and the john we use in the restroom are the same in Morse

I doubt it. Feel free to prove it if you can.

Yes, it's a story book full of fables. You should take a look at it some time. It's no ones task here to disprove your claims, it is your to support them. Your claims are meaningless without support. Why respond to someones intent to annoy others? Several people brought it up and you simply ignored them and continued doing it anyhow.

ASCII, encoding characters since 1960...

Sorry, the bible you speak of is not evidence of anything. It is a collection of books of hearsay. You'll need to look elsewhere for evidence.

You need to support this assertion on the existence of dark stars. Evidence please?