When I wrote my blog last week in support of Mike Huckabee, I didn’t know what I was getting into. My intention was to write two blogs, then go back to normal blog life, which for me doesn’t involve politics.

In a single day the blog had four times more hits than any day since I started it in June. Within 24 hours we’d received nearly forty comments, way more than usual, then we surged past fifty. I read these all by the way, and as a result checked out articles and watched videos of other candidates.

But the reader comment that most grabbed my attention was, “Pat Robertson just endorsed, formally, Rudy Giuliani. I would love your thoughts on that.” I found the video clip of Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Rudy G. That was the moment when things changed. This was no longer politics, which I dislike, it was a full-blown moral issue, full of biblical and theological and Christian implications. So I’ll put on hold what I’d planned to say in that second blog.

Meanwhile, this will be by far the longest blog I’ve ever done, really the length of an article. I tried to turn it into two blogs, but it just didn’t flow. So, you have options. First, feel free not to read it. Second, read it in two or more sessions, at your own pace, rather than straight through.

In answer to the question of what I think about Robertson’s endorsement of Giuliani, I think Robertson is absolutely wrong. That’s what this blog is about. (I remind you again I speak here not as the head of Eternal Perspective Ministries, but as an individual citizen.)

Over the years, I have sometimes appreciated Pat Robertson, and often disagreed with him. Now I am truly saddened for him. I shake my head in wonder at what has happened to him and other Christians who once stood up for innocent lives and moral concerns, but whose devotion has now shrunk to social conservativism and Republicanism. That an evangelical spokesperson—though I’m not sure who Robertson really represents anymore—would turn his back on unborn children to endorse Giuliani, who favors legalized abortion, is tragic.

Before we go further, none of this will make sense to you if you don’t understand why abortion is such a big deal. The still pic at the left is a 3D sonogram of a child in the womb. This link is to a beautiful slide show of living unborn children at various stages of development.Here’s another slide show, also beautiful, a worship experience to see these babies created in God’s image. These and the photos in this blog are all of living children in the womb.In contrast to the above, here is a link to pictures of what an abortion really does to children.

Warning: these are not made up photos; they are not exaggerated. They are real. This is simply what abortion is. Uncloaked, uncovered, unimaginably horrible. If these pictures, rather than banners and balloons, were hung alongside Rudy Giuliani and every candidate who defends legal abortion, we would turn away in horror at the evil of this position.

If, like many, you get upset about the fact that people would post these pictures or that I would link to them, I suggest you reserve your outrage for those who defend the right to commit such atrocities against children. It is not the photos that are immoral—it is abortion that is immoral. The photos only tell the truth most of us don’t want to see. It is the height of hypocrisy to support a candidate who defends legalized abortion, while getting mad at people who show the truth about abortion because the truth is so horrible.

Now, if you are prochoice, I’m nearly certain you didn’t click on the link showing what an abortion is. My question is, why would it be hard for you to watch something that you defend as being okay? If you are willing to stand up for the legal right to do something, shouldn’t you be willing to look at what that something really is? We hate the pictures because they tell the truth—that abortion is not a merely word on a page or in a debate, it is a horror inflicted upon children.If you say you are prolife, but you are considering supporting Rudy Giuliani, or any candidate of any party who favors legalized abortion, I pray you will go back and click on that video you passed on. Because if you really saw what abortion is and what it does to a child, I don’t think you would defend anyone’s right to it. If you refuse to look at what abortion is, you simply will not “get it.”God’s Word says of the innocent, “precious is their blood in his sight” (Psalm 72:14). He sees their blood, even if you and I turn away from it. (Having forced myself to watch that video today, though I’ve seen many like it, I wept and cried out to God to bring deliverance and justice to His children.)

Now, if abortion were the only issue, it would easily be enough to convince me not to vote for Giuliani. Ironically, there are other issues, ones that I find it incredible a “family values” advocate such as Robertson could ignore.

The New York Daily News reports that Giuliani is still alienated from his young adult children, daughter 18 and son 21, and rarely spends time with them. It has been difficult for them to accept their father’s adulterous relationship that led to a divorce from their mother. Many of us remember when Giuliani, still married, appeared publicly at galas with his girlfriend, when his children were aged 13 and 16. His children say that in the last number of years their father hasn’t been part of their lives. Understandably, they do not intend to support him in his campaign.

This is Giuliani’s third marriage. Now, I know dear people who are divorced and alienated from grown children, and I do not judge them, and would never single them out. But they are not running for public office and asking for my vote. Rudy Giuliani is.

Even the secular world sees the hypocrisy of Christians getting behind Giuliani. CBS correspondent Bob Scheiffer claims he has a helpful anonymous source he goes to in the evangelical community. Here’s what Scheffier said in his Face the Nation Commentary.

When Robertson announced he was supporting Rudy Giuliani, who is for so many of the things that Robertson has spent his life railing against—gay rights and abortion rights to name just two—I decided to go back to my high-level source with the obvious question: Why? There was a long pause.Finally, my source said “God only knows.”

Really, what are secular people to think? All the years that Christians have said unborn babies were precious, their lives were sacred, marriage between a man and a woman was sacred, marriage vows were sacred and family was sacred….were they just kidding? Because now some of the same Christians are saying “we support for president a man who has demonstrated that none of those are sacred to him.”

So what is sacred now? Being conservative? Being a Republican? Please. I am a disciple of Jesus.

So, how is it that followers of Jesus who stand for the cause of unborn children and family values are supposed to support a man who will not 1) defend the rights of the unborn, 2) define marriage as between a man and a woman; 3) keep his vows to his wife and 4) refrain from betraying and abandoning his own children?

Robertson promises Giuliani will lead the way against terrorism. But what would he do that most of the other Republican candidates, and perhaps one or more of the Democrats, wouldn’t do? And why is he unconcerned about the acts of terrorism committed against millions of unborn children across the country and in his own city? Why should we expect God to defend the cause of a nation that kills His children?

Giuliani said in his speech to the Values Voters Summit (I read every word of the transcript this week), “People of good conscience come to different conclusions about whether abortions should be legal in some circumstances.”

Actually, those with a good conscience cannot believe in the evil that it’s okay to cut babies to pieces. They may be sincere, but if they are, then they are deceived. A conscience that is deceived can be earnest, but it cannot be good. Giuliani’s statement is no different than saying “People of good conscience come to different conclusions about whether it should be legal to kill toddlers in some circumstances.”

Let me respond to the people, including some who commented on last week’s blog, who are adamantly ABC (Anybody But Clinton). Here’s a quote:

Christian Conservatives must decide on who is best to beat Hillary. That is THE most important point. Huckabee is great, but he WILL not beat Hillary. Whomever wins the Republican nomination must be supported by ALL Republicans. If we step back because we don’t like the candidate we as Christians will be voting in Hillary Clinton. This CANNOT happen.

I mean no disrespect, but actually, yes, there ARE worse things than Hillary being elected. In my opinion, having to stand before God to answer for compromising biblical convictions and acting as moral hypocrites by voting for an unprincipled man who will not defend the innocent and care for his own family is far worse. God will not judge me in light of whether I’ve followed conservativism or promoted Republicanism, but as to whether I have honored my Lord Jesus.

Jesus said if we love Him, we should keep his commandments. These include His commandments about the sanctity of life. As Christians we need to ask ourselves, do we love Jesus more than we dislike Hillary Clinton?

My daughter Angela sent me a note this week which I totally agree with: “I’m still going to believe that God is on his throne even if Hillary is elected.” If Giuliani and Clinton face each other in an election there would be some policy and philosophy differences, but what would be their fundamental differences in morality and faith and personal integrity? A vote for the lesser of evils is still a vote for evil.There are other options. At least a couple of them are prolife, and the one with the best chance of winning, I think, is Mike Huckabee. But regardless of what we think about his chances, why would we not choose someone who we have reason to believe will live by God-honoring principles and stand for the unborn and marriage and family and religious freedom whether in victory or defeat

You have no control over who in the end votes for Hillary Clinton. You do have control over who you vote for. You won’t be held accountable for someone else voting for a pro-abortion candidate. You will be held accountable if you vote for such a candidate. “But he was a Republican, Lord,” you may say at the judgment seat. “But I’m not a Republican,” Jesus may say. “I’m the original Independent.”

Sacrifice children on the altar of Republicanism? I won’t do it. The children aren’t expendable. The Republican party is. The logic that we’ll really save lives because fewer will die under Rudy than Hillary doesn’t cut it. No, I’ll vote for someone who won’t sacrifice children on the altar of expedience, pragmatism, partisanship or economic philosophy. And I won’t consider it a wasted vote, because if the two options on a ballot so blatantly dishonor Christ and His values, then the real waste would be voting for one of them.

To some this is naïve and impractical. But if we acted according to principle and conscience, if we stopped selling out because of our premature analysis of “electability,” if we did it God’s way instead of ours, maybe we would be coming over to His side rather than expecting Him to come over to ours.

Maybe then we would receive God’s approval. That’s what will matter in the last day. And that’s what should most matter to us now.

I can live with not being a Republican. I cannot live with ceasing to stand up for the little ones, of whom God says “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves; defend the cause of the poor and needy” (Proverbs 31:8-9). If Giuliani becomes the nominee, I think many will leave the Republican party to become Independents or join one of the smaller prolife affiliations, such as the Constitution party. Departing from the prolife position won’t save the Republican party—in the end it may destroy it.

Please—it is really too much to ask that a national leader opposes the legalized killing of children?

I will take the time to insert relevant Scripture, because without it we are always confused. Please meditate on it:

If the people of the community close their eyes when that man gives one of his children to Molech…I will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him and all who follow him… (Leviticus 20:1-5)

Do this so that innocent blood will not be shed in your land, which the LORD your God is giving you as your inheritance, and so that you will not be guilty of bloodshed. (Deuteronomy 19:10)

He sent them to destroy Judah…Surely these things happened to Judah according to the Lord’s command, in order to remove them from his presence because of the sins of Manasseh and all he had done, including the shedding of innocent blood. For he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the LORD was not willing to forgive. (2 Kings 24:2-4)

There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood… (Proverbs 6:16-19)

Therefore as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I will give you over to bloodshed and it will pursue you. Since you did not hate bloodshed, bloodshed will pursue you. (Ezekiel 35:6)

Every Christian must take these teachings seriously. Is the candidate’s stand on the issue of shedding innocent blood important enough to disqualify him as a candidate? Yes. While a single issue can’t qualify a candidate, it can disqualify him. Clearly this issue disqualifies Rudy Giuliani. I don’t think someone is a good candidate just because they are pro-life. But they cannot be a good candidate unless they are prolife.

John Piper takes this same position.

A few final thoughts. First, regarding electability: Instead of waiting to see who’s likely going to win, why not actually influence the election by getting behind someone we think is the right person, so they might become electable?

According to the Rassmussen report, Huckabee has edged past both McCain and Romney, putting him behind only Giuliani and Thompson, with upward momentum. His probable showing against Democratic opponents has steadily improved. Why don’t people stop saying he can’t win and get behind him, so he can win?

Is there a time for pragmatism? Sure. As long as you can stay within the realm of righteous principles, then go ahead and weigh pragmatic considerations, as a matter of wisdom. But there is no wisdom in unrighteousness. If you are tempted toward a pragmatic action that violates Scripture and conscience, do not succumb to that temptation. To do so is sin.

You must decide whether the killing of children pleases God or displeases Him. If you believe it displeases him, only support those who will speak up for those children, and defend them from the shedding of innocent blood.

Truthfully, I think it’s a lot less complicated than we make it. One day we’ll look back and wonder why we thought we should make all the compromises we did.

“The LORD said, ‘What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.’“ (Genesis 4:10)