What you believe is “humane” is relative. Although I believe we are stewards of animals, the US had always viewed animals as “property” and, in fact, they are still that, but now with special privileges other property cannot have.
It doesn’t really matter if you think social shaming would would on me or others, it is the only way animal issues should be handled. If not that way, then laws against penning your pets, eating meat, and the like will logically follow using the same argument you have given us. It’s simply another court case or Administration more to put it over to the liberal side from that point, on.
How can you justify slaughtering one’s animals for meat as “humane”? How can you justify tying up an animal or having it on a leash as “humane”? You can’t. You can only say that, “Well, we’ve always eaten meat so it should continue to be okay,” or, “Well, if the animal runs around, it might get hurt.” “So what?” they will say in return. It’s still not what you would do to a human, so it’s not “humane.”
Unless you are for doing that to humans, and then you and your argument are consistent.
Enjoy.
They aren't merely 'property' since they feel pain, an important distinction.
Actually, laws FOR penning pets, leash laws, etc are made to protect both the animal and other people's property rights.
Eating meat is totally legimate because the Bible allows it.
However, that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be humane standards set to remove as much pain and suffering from the animal as possible.
That isn't the 'liberal' view, that is the responsible thing to do, which is conservative.