Liked your post. I understand your point of view, from a distant viewpoint.



["The fact that you do not think they make appropriate pets is completely irrelevant. The only relevance is for your personal choice, don't keep them. But (in the absence of clear and significant threats to others) to belive it is appropriate to tell anyone else what they can and can not keep/do based on your feelings is what leads to things like dictatorships and theocracies. Do you want someone in power (elected or otherwise) telling you what to believe, to worship or not to worship, who to worship or who not to worship, based on their feelings??? There is really no difference. The concept is the same. It is simply imposing one's will over another's without the burdens associated with trying to maintain freedoms and rights."]



Why are my thoughts on the matter irrelevant? Nobody sees their opinions as irrelevant.



I do not see this as being a theocratic society, I see it as being more safe for animals, keepers and the general pet trade. Perhaps not the reptile trade. I've never said, "I approve of anything that the federal government or any state government does with laws" in any matter.



No I wouldn't want anyone telling my what to do. As someone else stated this was highly eloquent (I've gotten a lot of things that seemed like silly growls). Especially the first part, which I saw no problem in whatsoever. Your opinion is not unwelcome to me.



Still having a bit of trouble with the whole "you have a right" to own any animal thing, but I guess it's growing on me as a way of thinking for others.

[ Show Entire Thread ]