Your view of the reptile hobby

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by lady_bug87

Either I'm not being clear or you're not listening.

It's because you were not directly answering a basic question.

Its wrong because its selfish. Because we keep them for no reason than because we like them. No matter HOW you keep them you're selfish, if you really care about the animals you would be fighting for the hobby to stop collecting from wild sources, you wouldn't keep them in your home, you would go out and visit them in theirs.

There you go! Finally answered the question without bringing in irrelevant factors such as inbreeding.

[Mikoh4792]

But that leads me to ask, why is it wrong just because it's selfish? What if the animal being cared for does not suffer?

I don't see how something is automatically wrong just because it's selfish.

[StudentoReptile]

Okay, before we all get too huffy-puffy about this, let's recap a little bit....

1.) We can all generally agree to some extent, that keeping reptiles in captivity (especially in the private sector) is a selfish endeavor, whether it is for breeding, display or just for pets. Some of us come to terms with it, some of us are in denial, whatever. But with the rare exception of projects involving restoration of wild populations that may require captive breeding, anything typically involves us keeping the animals for our benefit, not theirs.

2.) Comparing different species is like comparing apples to oranges. Different species have different needs physiologically, mentally, and socially. This is old hat to many of us here, but it bears repeating. Comparing orcas to dogs to iguanas to snakes can be a murky discussion because the bottom line is THEY ARE NOT ALL THE SAME! Snakes prefer dark, warm, relatively confined quarters in solitude and generally thrive well in those conditions, where as dogs do not, so comparing basements full of snake racks to puppy mills does not fly. Period. The inhumane conditions of one species does not constitute inhumane conditions for another; ergo, the morality & ethics of keeping those different animals are not equal as well.

3.) The issue of longevity was brought up. I already noted my thoughts on that point, but to add to it, I'll merely say something that has been said many times before: merely surviving is not thriving.
------

This is and always be a very controversial topic. I keep reptiles just like everyone else. I can rationalize what I do just like everyone else, but at the end of the day, I keep reptiles in cages because I like to look at them and find them fascinating. Would my herps be better off in their native habitats instead of the confined quarters I keep them in? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps they would be less stressed to some degree, but I do know they are less exposed to disease and predators, and yes, they will likely live longer in my care. I also know my BP has been the first snake many people has ever held. my tortoises will bring joy and wonder to my children and (hopefully) grandchildren in decades to come. My water snake will help educate others about native species and proper snake identification. So besides my own selfish desires, I use my herps as tools or ambassadors to "give back" to my community and hopefully further the hobby in more ways than to just help people find better ways to keep snakes in plastic tubs.

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

But that leads me to ask, why is it wrong just because it's selfish? What if the animal being cared for does not suffer?

I don't see how something is automatically wrong just because it's selfish.

Unless you're putting your happiness above the animal's well-being, it's arguably not even selfish.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

I guess you're not getting my point. Why do you keep bringing inbreeding into this?

The only thing I am asking is why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles...just go over my last few posts. I clearly state I'm not talking about inbreeding, assist feeding...etc. I'm only talking about keeping reptiles and why it's wrong to do so.

And you miss my point again on the human part. It wasn't asked to be part of my argument. It was a side question to see where your head is at when using the same logic(nurturing the weak) with humans. It had no hidden agenda...something I also clarified.

Apologize when ready... =[

Honestly you're beginning to change the argument to fit your needs. You place these parameters on what anyone can build their response on because it doesn't fit with the view you're trying to get.

You're essentially trying to railroad people into appeasing your view.

You started out with this whole general topic but you keep telling the respondants that they can't use certain arguments...assist feed, inbreeding and such...

As well you simply can't compares snakes and humans. Even with your above explanation you're bringing them into the argument to try and goad Lori into saying something that will prove her a hypocrit. Compare apples to apples.

Lastly, selfish is not a good trait to have so how can one be selfish but yet still doing good? You're grasping at straws because now we're onto the definition of the word "selfish" and what that means.

[lady_bug87]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

It's because you were not directly answering a basic question.



There you go! Finally answered the question without bringing in irrelevant factors such as inbreeding.

Its all part of the hobby you want to improve so its all relevant

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

It's because you were not directly answering a basic question.



There you go! Finally answered the question without bringing in irrelevant factors such as inbreeding.

You brought in irrelevant factors when you started asking about humans to try and prove your point. You go and tell others they can't bring in other factors to prove their point.

You are really trying to make people see your view and your view only.

[lady_bug87]

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

Unless you're putting your happiness above the animal's well-being, it's arguably not even selfish.

Keeping them IS putting your happiness above their wellbeing

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

Unless you're putting your happiness above the animal's well-being, it's arguably not even selfish.

So how many people here can raise their hand that they first bought a snake not because they wanted it but because they felt it would somehow help the world?

You're grasping at straws.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Honestly you're beginning to change the argument to fit your needs. You place these parameters on what anyone can build their response on because it doesn't fit with the view you're trying to get.

You're essentially trying to railroad people into appeasing your view.

You started out with this whole general topic but you keep telling the respondants that they can't use certain arguments...assist feed, inbreeding and such...

Not at all. My original question to Lori was " why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles". She is the one who brought up inbreeding, assist feeding, and weakening a populations genes. No railroading here.

Yes some things you just can't use in an argument because it has no bearing. The only thing I was interested in was why it's wrong to keep reptiles....she finally gave her answer.

As well you simply can't compares snakes and humans. Even with your above explanation you're bringing them into the argument to try and goad Lori into saying something that will prove her a hypocrit. Compare apples to apples.

You're free to think this, but it's only an assumption and accusation on your part. I clarified there were no hidden motives behind that question and I also gave my reasoning as to why I asked.

Lastly, selfish is not a good trait to have so how can one be selfish but yet still doing good? You're grasping at straws because now we're onto the definition of the word "selfish" and what that means.

Do good? I never said anything about doing good. No grasping at straws here, just asking why selfish automatically makes something morally reprehensible.

Putting words in my mouth and making accusations at the same time.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

You brought in irrelevant factors when you started asking about humans to try and prove your point. You go and tell others they can't bring in other factors to prove their point.

Refer to my post before this.

You are really trying to make people see your view and your view only.

Actually I don't think I am. I was just asking a question. What is my view?

I have views about the current market (ie. I don't like the emphasis on morphs and such...etc) but I don't think I was forcing my views on Lori. I was only asking questions and tried to figure out her reasoning on her assertion that keeping reptiles was wrong.

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by lady_bug87

Keeping them IS putting your happiness above their wellbeing

In what way? Do you think a snake living in the wild that has to avoid predators and hunt for food is less stressed and more healthy than one kept under good conditions in captivity?

Also, I never said that I think it's good to keep snakes in captivity. I simply don't think it's inherently bad or selfish.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Not at all. My original question to Lori was " why is it morally reprehensible to keep reptiles". She is the one who brought inbreeding, assist feeding, and weakening a populations genes with these factors. No railroading here.

Yes some things you just can't use in an argument because it has no bearing. The only thing I was interested in was why it's wrong to keep reptiles....she finally gave her answer.



You're free to think this, but it's only an assumption and accusation on your part. I clarified there were no hidden motives behind that question and I also gave my reasoning as to why I asked.



Do good? I never said anything about doing good. No grasping at straws here, just asking why selfish automatically makes something morally reprehensible.

Putting words in my mouth and making accusations at the same time.

Yes. She brought aspects in because she felt they would help her argument. You then told her she can't use them to support her argument. So yes I am correct. Thank you.

Again it's no assumption. You're comparing apples to oranges. Compare apples to apples. Humans are not apples in this case.

You asked why being selfish is wrong. Quite simply it's because selfish is a trait that is widely accepted as a negative trait. Ergo it's wrong to be selfish.

Like I said you're now at the definition of selfish to prove a point. You've lost...

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by Mikoh4792

Refer to my post before this.



Actually I don't think I am. I was just asking a question. What is my view?

I have views about the current market (ie. I don't like the emphasis on morphs and such...etc) but I don't think I was forcing my views on Lori. I was only asking questions and tried to figure out her reasoning on her assertion that keeping reptiles was wrong.

You didn't make any reply to pointing out that you brought in irrelevant arguments to try and help you.

Everything else is just noise.

Back to the actual argument. Which you clearly don't really have one.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

In what way? Do you think a snake living in the wild that has to avoid predators and hunt for food is less stressed and more healthy than one kept under good conditions in captivity?

Also, I never said that I think it's good to keep snakes in captivity. I simply don't think it's inherently bad or selfish.

That's a silly argument, isn't it?

How can you even make the point that an animal living in the wild is unhealthy and stressed out. Have you seen any studies to suggest this?

Have you even seen many animals in captivity? I have seen dozens of animals stressed out in captivity. In fact I would even gamble that more animals die from stress in captivity than in the wild.