Originally Posted by scccdoc
The point is over your head if you do not relate the two. In nature, there IS aberrant behavior, so what's your point? If it exists, it is normal?
No, not really. Where does your definition of aberrant come from? It is a subjective definition that comes from you, not nature. The point being, if no one is around to define the idea of aberrant then there is no such thing. Even when someone does, that opinion is only valid for them.
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."
JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."