My question was, in fact, in good faith. I wanted to know if you would apply your generalization to me, as the way it read it seemed to me like it would.

Apparently it doesn't, so I guess I didn't get what you meant.

I tried to go back and reread it, but it's flagged now and I don't see a way to.

I think your example is actually closer to intellectual honesty than you think it is.

"Small government" is not "no government".

To a pro-life conservative, abortion is murder.

I've yet to meet a conservative who doesn't think the government should be involved in preventing murder.

Requiring you look at the victim before killing them is a pretty pathetic protection against murder, but it's probably better than nothing.

I'd guess from your framing that you support abortion rights. If so, I can certainly see why this would look like intellectual dishonesty to you, but as I argued above, I think that's due to not understanding the people you're talking about well enough, at least in this case.