Reptile & Amphibian Forums

It looks like we have a better chance to keep the animals that we love. The people have spoken !!! Liberalism is a disease !!

Electing Republicans does not guarantee that our snakes are safe. They love to legislate against anything they fear or don't understand.
-----
1.1 Cancun BCI
1.0 Hog Island BCI
1.0 Leopard (66% PH Albino) BCI
0.1 Hypo Blood (66% PH Kahl Albino & 66% PH Type II Anery) BCI
0.1 Brazilian Rainbow Boa

Yes, Liberals excel at legislating against things they don't like or understand. I welcome more "hands off" government and faith is good. Let Freedom Ring. Bill
-----
...three years ago it was just another snake cult...
The Retic is King.
Anacondas-the other Dark Side.
Afrocks-the dark side of the Dark Side.

Your faith is all fine and good for you and your family, but should not be pushed on others. Republican "faith based" legislative mentality is the complete OPPOSITE of hands off government. They use their personal religious beliefs as a guide, instead of logic and reason. These are the same people that support creationist pseudo-science, because they think evolution is "just a theory"...
-----
1.1 Cancun BCI
1.0 Hog Island BCI
1.0 Leopard BCI (66% PH Kahl Albino)
0.1 Hypo Blood BCI (66% PH Kahl Albino & 66% PH Type II Anery)
0.1 Brazilian Rainbow Boa

there are good and bad on both sides and IMO we should leave politics off the forum that is supposed to be about our love of BOAS.

I know I'm in the minority being on the 'left'... these types of postings ("yay repubs" or "better vote repub or you'll lose your snakes" bs) seem to be more and more common on this forum in the last few years which is exactly why I've pretty much stopped posting here. We all have our strong beliefs and no one will always agree all the time.

Can't we all just focus on what we CAN agree on? Boas are freakin awesome.

end of line.
-April

-----
'There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."' -Rainshadow

Exactly. It's unfortunate that people don't understand that there is no real difference between democrats and republicans. Politicians of both sides are beholden to corporations, not the American people.

Why can't we have a small, environmentally conservative, liberal government?

It's amazing how they keep us all divided. Divide and conquer people. It's the way they've been controlling us all!
-----
Jason Dowell

No argument here . . . . . I've given up on the 2 party system.

I lost all trust in the Democrats , the Democratic party of old
would have been on the the Reptile enthusiasts side
helping us keep our reptiles and jobs.

I'm all about trying something new

Libertarians got my vote where ever and when ever possible yesterday.

It is harsh to have our personnel belief system seem as though it's under attack making some of us want to turn away.

but we can not stick our heads in the sand and hope these problems
go away, we must find common ground.

I do agree lets concentrate on Boas !

. . . Lar M

-----
Boas By Klevitz

I Support USark.org

the only way to make a difference is to keep fighting and vote them out when they do not represent their constituents. Write letters, make phone calls, educate yourselves and families. It all starts in your own house. Then and only then will we begin to see changes in this corrupt system.

I wouldnt have said anything political, if it didnt matter to the boa nation. We all must be blind if we have forgotten about the thousands of letters that were sent to our representatives, and what letter was behind most of their names (D). ...So if repubs and dems are the same, then lets all be single isssue voters and vote on our reps who support reptile nation. Since their the same ?????

>> We all must be blind if we have forgotten about the thousands of letters that were sent to our representatives, and what letter was behind most of their names (D). ...

Then we should be trying to have civil discourse and work to educate our elected officials that DO have a (D) next to their name about anti-reptile legilation, not just blindly vote them out and hope that our rights will be preserved simply because of some letter next to someone else's name.

Urgh I really want to stay out of this, I shouldn't even respond, feel free to ignore me. We can agree to disagree on this point.

Take care,
-April
-----
'There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."' -Rainshadow

My point is it doesnt matter what letter they have. I vote out people who do not represent our personal freedoms. We can then educate them before they run for office again. The biggest fear to any elected official is that they dont get re elected. R's and D's do not get a free pass.

Were you at the rally to restore sanity / keep fear alive in DC?

If so I'm completely jealous.

>>Were you at the rally to restore sanity / keep fear alive in DC?

Wish I could have made the trip to be a part of it, but alas it was not possible. I was at the satellite rally in San Francisco, there were about 1,000-1,500 of us. Would have been more except it was raining and that kept a lot of people at home or at other gathering spots indoors. We watched the rally on a jumbo tron in front of city hall, good times were had by all!

the crowd went all the way back past the statue and extended out on both sides of the trees.

-----
'There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."' -Rainshadow

I was there with my wife and 2 of my daughters went also.

Reid , Palosi and the like..just as bad for this country as bin ladin. They are for everything bad for this country...Murdering babies, same sex marriage(I dont hate gays, I say "Love the sinner and hate the sin", higher taxes, punish people that work hard and reward lazy bums who like to milk the system dry.
The same folk who made the phrase "walk away from my home" ok to be a deadbeat.
I have a few liberal friends, but we surely dont talk politics, most sports, astronomy, astro physics and we really try to avoid political discussions.

Jon stewart is a dope..rachel maddow, and the rest of the liberal media are elitest snobs, just like the Harvard educated king of them all O'bama. Socialism anyone? NOT.

When the "rich" get to keep more of thier money..the country does better as a whole. Its jeoulousy that fuels hatred for the "rich" or as I call them, people with a good work ethic and ambition.

Yea, they may be extremes on either side, but at the end of the day, the govt is here to protect us from enemies, not decide if my sons happy meal can have a toy or not..thats the san fransico loons for you..Califorina is just a whacked out twilight zone!

I love the new FL governor Scott, he plans to drug test those who get welfare, food stamps and unemployment, test positive..no free ride...you know the ACLU>>NAACP will be up in arms "how dare you make a unemployed lazy drunk take a drug test...it not be fair"
& he is going to adopt some of AZ illegal alien laws. We have so many illegals here in Fl..its insane how we have let mexico invade our county and turn it into the drug selling grounds and we have to sit back and smile. My wife and family are of hispanic heritage and do not agree with the illeagl aliens just coming here not doing it the right way.

Man Freedom of speech is good...but I know it dont exist in here, so adios amigos.

I respect what u are saying and d agree to some extent, but our love of boas is under attack from some of the people we elect.I Dont care what party any one belongs to, but we have a say in to who takes office, and it is a fact that reptile nation has a better chance to survive, based upon past voting from some of our republican and democrats who arenow gone.

I thought I would throw my idea out there when I read your title to your post.
Faith based laws may be proposed but in reality like I tell lots of hard core faith based snake fearers, that the bible says the devil "took" the shape of a serpent, or in others, kind of "hid" himself in a serpent. Meaning he is NOT a serpent, just chose that body to get close to Adam and Eve. Am I too far off here? Lol. I ask them what if he took the shape of a bird to fly in? or a snail?
Believe it or not, I have had alot of people go out to their cars and bring back a bible and re-read those parts, and they actually agree, and by end of their time at our shop, are actually holding and thinking about buying one more times then not. Soley becuase they misread or understood that he WAS a serpent, thus all serpents are the devil, not the he took the shape of one.

I also have discussions(shop talk) with ppl regarding possible laws, and faith can be possibly be used for us not against us in my opinion.
First part of bible, while god was creating( this is what i remember anyways), at the end or so, he gave humans dominion over all animals and the earth. If you take my snakes away, you are interfering with my religious right to excercise dominion. Government , if I recall, cannot prohibit you from excercising your religous right. Am I remebering it correctly? Just food for thought, thought it was a good argument, granted, its probably how it is interpreted, but you never know.....more options is better then less....

good post

Im not saying anything is guaranteed, but our chances are better. The whole faith based thing is irrelevant to this discussion. Im not a repub or a dem , although I support less gov't when it comes to personal freedoms and the constitution.

Please give an example of a faith based law. Not aware that any exist.

It's not so much blatantly religious laws as it is the underlying reason they hold some of their positions on issues. Especially for a party who supports "personal freedom and responsibility" this is even more ironic. Examples of issues where the majority of opposition/support is based off of religion and not logic and reason:

Gay Marriage
DADT in the military
Human stem cell research funding
Abortion
Abstinence only education
Creationism being taught as science
"Blue laws" in Southern states
etc...
-----
1.1 Cancun BCI
1.0 Hog Island BCI
1.0 Leopard BCI (66% PH Kahl Albino)
0.1 Hypo Blood BCI (66% PH Kahl Albino & 66% PH Type II Anery)
0.1 Brazilian Rainbow Boa

abortion is legal, and has nothing to do with religion. You either believe that life begins at conception or not. Completely a scientific arguement (most religions believe concepton), but plenty of atheists are pro-life . The other issues are important, but I dont lose any sleep over social issues too often. I am all about live and let live. Im done with politics .

I find your quote from the previous post interesting:

"The other issues are important, but I don't lose any sleep over social issues too often."

When anyone's liberty is challenged we should all take note. That's exactly how anti-snake laws get passed. Some politician says, "snakes are bad, I want to ban them." The vast majority of voters don't own snakes, so they are like, "I don't care, it's doesn't affect me." Therefore the law gets passed with hardly any opposition. That's why it's so important that the law making process be based on logic and reason instead of emotions and superstition.
-----
1.1 Cancun BCI
1.0 Hog Island BCI
1.0 Leopard BCI (66% PH Kahl Albino)
0.1 Hypo Blood BCI (66% PH Kahl Albino & 66% PH Type II Anery)
0.1 Brazilian Rainbow Boa

point taken, but we all choose to be selective in what we want to protect the most. My main point is that I have a libertarian point of view on most social issues of "Live and let live" with out gov't interference.

Not being able to buy alcohol on Sundays..

Religious institutions are exempt from both income and property taxes. They don't have to file a 990 form that shows their income and expenses, so are unaccountable for how they use money they receive.

If you think your sex life and reproductive decisions are your business, check the statutes. All states apply unjustifiable restrictions on consensual sex, sex education, contraception and abortion.

Marriage is defined in American law as under the control of religious institutions. Therefore, same-sex marriages are out (though increasingly permitted in some states).

Stem cell research still faces irrational restrictions because of religious beliefs that an embryo is a real human being, and that destroying these nearly invisible specks is murder.

Many public schools or individual teachers downplay teaching evolution in science classes because of pressure from fundamentalists who believe the Bible is a divinely inspired science textbook.

It goes on and on, ad nauseam...
-----
Jason Dowell

Abortion is about property. A newborn baby is a property owner (itself). Believing that all human 'entities' throughout all stages of life own their body has nothing to do with religion.

Macro evolution is our current 'best guess' that is easily proven to be flawed. Most creationists that I've seen simply do not want a flawed best guess being taught to children as a proven fact.
-----
-Ryan Homsey
TopNotchBoas.com Website

Im sorry about the political stuff , but no law had anything to do with my 2 girls being born, and if they were embryos for research they wouldnt be here today. Ask any guy "size doesnt matter"

Might not be able to buy it in some areas, but you can sure drink it. I can buy it my area , but I know the Bible Belt doesnt allow sunday sales. Stupid law. 1st miracle in the bible. Jesus turned water into wine for his mothers wedding and they all got smashed !!! Wish I was there.

This day and age Republicans are clamoring more than ever for financial conservatism and job growth. I don't see the "Snakes are bad because the Bible says so! Lets eliminate a viable industry!" being a prominent mentality amongst conservatives in this economy.

Sure, many people do not fully understand the leftist/rightist end goal/corresponding propaganda (ie. that they're both for bigger government) and it's certainly relevant to refresh people on that idea from time to time (stop voting for Republicans/Democrats!). But I think you're off base in assuming more Republican control is worse/as bad for us as boa breeders.

There's also gaping logic holes throughout your responses here but this probably isn't the place for extensive political/religious discussion, so I'll leave it be.
-----
-Ryan Homsey
TopNotchBoas.com Website

BRAVO. I couldn't agree more. In my opinion, you have spoken the truth. However, in this forum many will disagree with you. Sadly in the earlier days of our battle, even mentioning this would have gotten this thread yanked. For saying the exact thing you stated, I had several of my posts pulled. I guess what I'm saying is thanks and its good to see another person who knows the truth and isn't afraid to say it. Fraternally, Mike Panichi
-----
Honesty is my only policy
www.mikepanicreptiles.com

I wouldnt have said anything political, if it didnt matter to the boa nation. We all must be blind if we have forgotten what letter was behind most of the senators and house members who were opposed (D). ...So if repubs and dems are the same, then lets all be single isssue voters and vote on our reps who support reptile nation. Since their the same ????? Thanks any way Mike

The fact is in both the Senate and the House we found members of one Party already on our side from the outset of the legislative assaults we have suffered. That was the Republicans. The legislation we were fighting was introduced by Democrats. Some of the Democrats eventually became sympathetic to our position and helped as well. Those are the facts.

No two people are ever going to agree on all the other stuff that the parties fight about. We should all come together preserving the freedom of individuals to keep and breed the animals that we all love.

I understand people who have always stood with the party who is the willing participant in harming us have a hard time coming to grips with this. Name calling and unrelated inflammatory rhetoric have nothing to do with the only issue that matters to us all here. I personally find myself differing on the vast majority of what either party does. So what?

We are all in the same fox hole together trying to preserve the freedom to keep and breed the animals we love. Our politics on other things should have nothing to do with this fight. It's just a good idea to recognize who else is in this same fox hole with us helping us and who is on the other side.
-----
Jeff Ronne Sr
The Boaphile
Director USARK

Originator of Boaphile Plastics
The Boaphile Boa Site

That is exactly what I wanted to convey. Thanks for the feedback.

Firstly... Neither party cares about You, Your freedoms or Your Pursuit of Happiness. They only care about being in power. If the D's thought that a Constitutional Amendment to make keeping every reptile legal would keep them in power, we'd either have a 28th Amendment or would have had a Republican filibuster to fight it.

When it comes to keeping reptiles, there is no doubt that Republicans are more likely to not cause us herpers problems. So when it comes to one aspect of my life, I have to admit that the R's do better. Smaller government and less taxes sound good to me too.

However when it comes to being beholden to the superstitious masses, the R's are far worse. When the D's are in charge, I have to focus my political fight on keeping reptiles legal. When the R's are in charge, I have to focus my political fight on upholding the "Establishment Clause".

When the Democrats are in charge, I send my money to USARK. When the Republicans are in charge, I send my money to Americans United. Now that they're split, I can split the donations.

I agree that many of our politicians dont care, but some of them do care.It is our job to make sure that they care (with our vote) As far as your other thoughts on dems and repubs, I couldnt disagree more.

Please elaborate...

>>I agree that many of our politicians dont care, but some of them do care.It is our job to make sure that they care (with our vote) As far as your other thoughts on dems and repubs, I couldnt disagree more.

With out getting to off topic, I have checked on the voting record of Steve Chabot in Ohio, and over the last 20 years, I cant disagree with any vote that he has made. You may not agree with his voting record, but he has voted the will of his constituents for 20 years !!! Not an earmark or kick back kind of guy. The only way to see what your rep is doing, is to vote them up or down based upon how they represent their district. They can say what they want, because most voters are way too lazy to look into the voting records. They watch the ads ???? Less gov't is the only way baby !!! Please dont label all R's one way and D's another. It shows that you may be lazy.

We're off topic now... but might as well keep it going until we've been booted. The voting record of a politician being consistent with the will of his constituents is not good evidence of him not being most concerned about being re-elected. It's quite the opposite. I even just went to your guys website and what did I see... the same type of red-herring political ad you are saying people shouldn't be watching. He's the same.

Let's take a step back here. A little over a generation ago, the Republicans tried to get universal health care passed. The Democrats fought hard against it, calling it too expensive and un-american, and won. Now we have complete role reversal with the parties. What has changed? The only change is who is in power.

What's ahead? Expect to see less efforts on banning herps (good) and more effort on trying to ban flag burning, inserting superstition into gov't, and no real effort to reduce debt.

>>With out getting to off topic, I have checked on the voting record of Steve Chabot in Ohio, and over the last 20 years, I cant disagree with any vote that he has made. You may not agree with his voting record, but he has voted the will of his constituents for 20 years !!! Not an earmark or kick back kind of guy. The only way to see what your rep is doing, is to vote them up or down based upon how they represent their district. They can say what they want, because most voters are way too lazy to look into the voting records. They watch the ads ???? Less gov't is the only way baby !!! Please dont label all R's one way and D's another. It shows that you may be lazy.

You would rather have them vote against the constituents ? Any politician wants to re-elected, and their is nothing wrong with that. You are cherry picking silly issues that both sides like to bring up (because they are emotional) but petty. Their are great representatives on both sides. I think you are bitter ,biased and lazy about the facts. The convenient truth is always the truth my friend.

Hillary tried to get Universal Health care passed (not the repubs ???). Do your homework little boy.

The mans name was Richard Nixon who tried to pass universal health care. Senator Edward Kennedy was part of his biggest opposition. All Kennedy needed to become a proponent of Universal Healthcare was for HIS party to try to pass it. All the Republicans needed to oppose it was for Hillary and later Obama to try to pass it.

Perhaps hold off on the insults before you do your own homework. This little boy is old enough to be a grandpa.

>>Hillary tried to get Universal Health care passed (not the repubs ???). Do your homework little boy.

10 yrs ago was Nixon ? Kennedy did the same thing to Carter. Im not so sure that Nixon wanted Health univ health care, but for now I will take your word for it. Kennedy wanted universal health care as long as he got credit for it. My insult stands. You are proving my point. Kennedy is the one who cared so deeply for the common man, and supported universal health care in his final years when it was going to be his legacy. Nixon went against what conservatism truly means, and stood up for what he beieves was right with universal health care. Doesnt sound like a politician looking for re election to me. You buried yourself again with your own words young boy. Nixon was wrong, just like many people are wrong. Obviously Nixon wasnt too concerned about getting re elected when he chose to support univ healt care.

Where did you get 10 years ago? I said a little over a generation ago. Since you're not familiar with what the Republican President of the United States did back then, your criticism of him "Going against what conservatism means" is simply invalid. You're admitting ignorance to a topic, what conservatives stood for 40 years ago, and applying today's more radicalized version of conservatism as the standard to judge the very thing you aren't familiar with.

Continue with your insults towards me though if it makes you feel better about yourself.

>>10 yrs ago was Nixon ? Kennedy did the same thing to Carter. Im not so sure that Nixon wanted Health univ health care, but for now I will take your word for it. Kennedy wanted universal health care as long as he got credit for it. My insult stands. You are proving my point. Kennedy is the one who cared so deeply for the common man, and supported universal health care in his final years when it was going to be his legacy. Nixon went against what conservatism truly means, and stood up for what he beieves was right with universal health care. Doesnt sound like a politician looking for re election to me. You buried yourself again with your own words young boy. Nixon was wrong, just like many people are wrong. Obviously Nixon wasnt too concerned about getting re elected when he chose to support univ healt care.

Your lazy ways have done you in once more. Here is what Nixon was proposing (nothing like todays massive health care debacle)
Medicare and Medicaid were strong programs from the start, and wildly popular – so much so that liberal Democrats in Congress began looking for ways to expand coverage for all Americans, to create “Medicare for All.” Indeed, when Richard Nixon ran for re-election in 1972, he initially thought his likeliest opponent would be a young Senator who was making expanding health care to every American the cause of his career – Ted Kennedy. From the point of view of maintaining a political livelihood for his party, Nixon’s decision to tackle universal health care in 1974 made a lot of sense.

Moreover, Nixon’s plan would be a stark contrast to the single-payer plans on the table. In his 1974 State of the Union address, a key feature that he stressed was that his plan would require no new taxes – certainly not the $80 to $100 million that a Medicare for All program was though to cost. As he said, “This is the wrong approach. This has been tried abroad, and it has failed. It is not the way we do things here in America.” Instead, Nixon proposed building on the employer-based insurance system, Medicare and Medicaid. Those who were not offered benefits by their employer would be eligible for a subsidized public plan with costs shared by the federal and state government – basically, a Medicaid that was subsidized, not free. More importantly, a minimum level of comprehensive benefits would be established for everyone, regardless of how you were covered. (It’s worth noting that at the same time, on a parallel track to his Comprehensive Health Insurance Act, Nixon was also giving government support to the creation of HMOs.)

Surprise – there was no outcry of socialized medicine from the AMA or the private insurance industry, since the reform plan would hardly affect them. Even as the Watergate scandal was unfolding, Ted Kennedy brokered a compromise between the White House and Democrats. But pressure against the plan came from the left – particularly labor unions – who thought that with a Democrat sure to retake the White House in 1976, they could get a better deal on health care reform then. Ultimately, time ran out