One of the main reasons i keep fish is because i appreciate their natural beauty. I would love to be able to travel around the world and view the fish i keep in their natural habitats rather than house them in aquaria, but time, money, etc do not permit this, so i have to settle for aquariums. I attempt to keep mine as natural as possible, and only keep natural strains of fish. To me, the whole point of aquariums is to have a slice of nature in your home. (or slices if you have more than one tank, like me). None of my tanks are biotopic, but you wont find bright gravel, fake ornaments, etc. in any of my tanks.
What this all means is that i prefer wild fish and natural habitats. I support the conservation of fish in their natural habitat, but i also understand that hybrids and line bred fish are a significant part of our hobby, and excluding them would be wrong. If someone prefers man-made fish to natural ones, then let them keep them. Think about dogs and cats. Both of these are non-natural, line bred (effectively), probably even hybrids as well, yet most households have at least one of them, and i have NEVER heard someone reccomending the keeping of wolfs and wildcats as opposed to cats and dogs. Why should it be any different with fish? Yes, most cichlids don't have the potential to kill you, but neither do wildcats (the small ones that domestic cats came from, not lions and tigers, etc). So, i think we, as a hobby, need to recognize our differences, accept them, and move on.
However, there is one area where i feel differently: I do not support tbe line breeding and hybridization of any rare or endangered fish, as this kind of ruins it for the natural fish keepers. However, if a fish is common in the hobby, go ahead, hybridize and line breed away
