I've wanted a large monitor lizard for a long time, but I don't have the room or time for one and won't for at least 10 years, so I'm not going to get one.
Has she said she doesn't have the room or time?....
Yes, because being pawed over and poked by one human is somehow *less* traumatic than just being looked at from 20 feet away, while having 20 friends of your species to interact with.
If she has a colony, it will be with others of it's own species. If it is in a center specifically for primates, it is also with others of it's own kind. Either way, it ins't getting yelled at and scared by little kids and, in the cases of open enclosures in zoos, getting crap thrown at it by ignorant people. It would be getting good care and food, as well as the social environemtn it needs.
Snakes are not social, and therefor are not being deprived of a social life necasry for healthy mental well-being. We can approximate a living condition for them, and mostly leave them be, and they are "happy" to live, being fed by us.
Ok.. I have to ask... do you speak parseltongue? If not, then I wouldn't be making a statement like that. All pet owners can only assume that they are "happy."
Declawing cats is one thing I cannot stand. It's a matter of an owner caring too much for their FURNITURE and not their animal, so they have it mutilated instead of training the animal to scratch somewhere else.
I agree with this completely. There are plenty of cases that I have seen where the pet is declawed for it's own safety as well as other animal's safety. "How could that be?" some might ask. Well, I have seen some cases where the animal was unable to retract it's claws do to certain brith defects, and constantly getting it stuck in things, leading to injury. There are other cases that I have seen where the animal doesn't realize how badly it is harming others through play. I do strongly disagree with declawing unless it is a case like what I just described.
Putting muzzles on dogs in order to take them outside to urinate is the LAW, especially if the animal is deemed dangerous. There is a difference here.
Yes, but it is a seriously flawed law. Most dogs I have come into contact with that are of a breed deemed "dangerous" are the calmest, nicest dogs I have ever come across. I've even seen quite a few that refused to bite even when being abused. Like I said before, just because the animal CAN be dnagerous, DOESN'T mean it WILL be dangerous.
All in all, it seems to me that the original poster is taking all the steps neccesary to take great physiological care of the animal, and is planning on taking the neccesary action to get it the social care it requires.
As for the insults that have been thrown on the original poster, it is kinda immature. By this I am referring to things like "At least you got your screen name right."