I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with Analog on this one, with all due respect HairoftheDog. You make a convincing argument about the morality of the situation, but bottom line, these aren't humans we're talking about, they're animals. I'm not "for" the torture of human companion animals, of course not. But this factory could add, as Analog pointed out, revenue to some people, instead of making them be unemployed and living off the gov't dole. As a conservative, we should support this.
It basically comes down to an issue of whether or not humans or animals are more important, and I choose humans every time.
You make a convincing argument about the morality of the situation, saying basically how can we treat companions like this, when they only give loyalty. But where does that logic stop? What if someone forms a bond with a cow? Does that mean that eating cows is wrong? Or sheep?
Bottom line again, to me, humans rule over animals. That doesn't mean we should treat them cruely JUST to treat them cruely. But if our survival depends on a few animals getting hurt, I say go for it.
The reality of the situation is much dirtier than just the choice of whether the animal should be butchered. There are many acts of cruelty involved before the shot that ended the animal's life. I would consider that there are options, improvements that might make the process more humane. I think those are worthwhile fights also short of outright banning. But I also must admit that I have no trouble banning export of horses for meat.
OPut here in Cali they ryun these stupid "Happy cow" dairy ads, showing the dairy cows frolicking in lush green fields.
The truth is, most of them are penned rather tightly, shot up with hormones and anti-biotics, and there is no green grass for them to frolick in.
It's not anti-conservative to try to be a bit concerned about what we do. "Screw all but humans and human needs" is not the way to go.