OMG, denying the use of the word. That is clearly denying someone their right to do... something? Wrong. The word "marriage" comes from the judeo-christian religious tradition and it is their right for the term to be used by their choosing. Marriage is only sanctioned and regulated by the state insofar as it matters for tax purposes and other legal issues. You believe that being able to use the term and redefine marriage is a "right" when it isn't. In fact, marriage is not even a right. You cannot marry a 12 year old, you cannot marry your sister; there are many people that you cannot legally or rightfully marry. As far as legal bindings go, there are a number of states that offer civil unions, and, as I already said, a gay couple have as many "rights" as a non-gay couple.
I've got a degree in biology and I've dissected human cadavers, looked at numerous preserved fetuses, and seen a number of embryos under microscopes. Point is, a human being is a human being when it has human DNA. If you want to start using an arbitrary definition like "sentience," then we need to start looking at whether people with severe mental retardation and other mental disabilities have "sentience." My best friend has a younger brother with Downs Syndrome... he could not survive for more than a few days in all likelihood without having some kind of periodic supervision. Babies cannot be defined as "sentient." And we could go on and on... As far as the Constitution goes, it says you have a RIGHT to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If it's ok for me to kill you before you're born, then what happened to the right to life? Guess it isn't there...
Again, I made my point with drugs perfectly clear. If people were going to do drugs and then have to deal with the fallout ON THEIR OWN, then I would be 100% fine with it being legalized. I have never and will never use drugs, but I've got absolutely no problem with someone sitting in their house smoking weed and being a loser if that's what they want to do. But, as I said, I'm damn sure not going to pay for their rehab when they get addicted to coke, or pay for welfare for them because they can't maintain a simple job, or anything of the like. If we break down the socio-governmental network of using tax money to help out people with problems they have created for themselves, then hey, people can smoke as much weed as they want and I'm fine with it.
You clearly don't understand conservatism as a philosophy. That's ok, because the vast majority of people, even those that are conservatives, do not either. I would be more than happy to have a discussion on conservatism as a philosophy and the merits of that philosophy within our government's framework, but I'm not sure this is the thread to do it in.
Gay couples (consenting adults) do not have the same rights in this country as other people. You even state as much in your replies though to you it's a minor issue.
As far as what I believe, I don't think the government should be involved in what I see as a church issue anyways. If anything, the government should look at all "marriages" as a civil union. As far as I see, the use of the term is a free speech and freedom of religion thing.
Personally, I think abortions are a terrible thing and I hope nobody in my family ever decides to have one. I think that both sides spend way too much money and effort on the issue instead of just preventing getting there in the first place. From your argument, "Point is, a human being is a human being when it has human DNA." So birth control is bad because it wastes DNA?
I think we about agree on the drug issue.
I'm probably much more conservative than I am liberal, but I do not really consider myself either. I tend to be more of a Libertarian or Constitutionalist as far as parties go. I believe we should be allowed to pull that 900lb TV on our heads and deal with the consequences. I don't think most modern "conservatives" really believe that.