Recently I’ve read several compelling posts by evangelicals about why they would not support Rudy Guiliani if he wins the Republican nomination, even if it means conceding the Presidency to Hillary Clinton.

You can see them here, here, and here.

Paul Kengor, a presidential historian who recently authored God and Hillary: A Spiritual Life talks about why a Clinton presidency should be of grave concern to pro-lifers:

If you’re a pro-lifer, and if no issue is more important to you than the right of an unborn child to have life, then nothing could be more calamitous than a President Hillary Clinton. I don’t know of any politician who is more uncompromising and extreme on abortion rights than Hillary Clinton. I know this well and don’t state it with anger or hyperbole. Her extremism on abortion rights was the single most shocking, inexplicable find in my research on her faith and politics. I couldn’t understand it. No question. It is truly extraordinary. Nothing, no political issue, impassions her like abortion rights. For Mrs. Clinton, abortion-rights is sacred ground.

By the way, speaking of Catholics, Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II saw this abortion extremism in Hillary, and both confronted her on it repeatedly, especially Mother Teresa, right up until the day she died. I have a chapter on this in the book. It’s a gripping story.

As the Republican and Democratic primaries near, evangelicals must get serious about how we are going to respond to the prospects of potentially two pro-choice candidates running for office. The time may well be upon us that we can no longer vote a ballot strictly according to political parties. Evangelicals need to mobilize behind an electable candidate who holds to our core values, even if that reduces us to one-issue voters (such as John Piper). I, for one, will never knowingly cast a vote for a pro-choice candidate, even if it means that I have to be governed by the socialist Hillary Clinton.