Christians Should Vote For Trump Despite His Abortion Stance

Following former President Donald Trump’s disclosure of his thoughts on abortion, I have spoken with many conservative Christians who now refuse to give him their vote. Many who take an abolitionist stance on abortion, meaning they call for the immediate abolition of both procedural and chemical abortion with no compromise, say that Trump’s new stance is a backstep from his previous history on the issue and that they cannot in good conscience give him their votes.  

In a recent article for Abolitionists Rising, Sam Jones argues: “Any candidate that openly opposes abolishing abortion is not worthy of your vote. It doesn’t matter what the consequences are — the ends don’t justify the means — it doesn’t matter how much more comfortable one candidate’s win would make you or your family. All that matters is what God has commanded, and that we demand obedience to that command.” Such sentiments are very common among Christian abortion abolitionists.  

Certainly, Christians should strive to vote for candidates who uphold God’s standard for justice. Likewise, when politicians like Donald Trump articulate compromised positions concerning the issue of abortion, Christians should call such leaders to repentance. Nevertheless, Christians can still cast a vote for former President Trump in good conscience, despite his stance on abortion.  

The entire American political process is premised on compromise. By design, no one fully gets their way in our system, at least not immediately. So, although Christians should strongly desire and pray for the complete and immediate abolition of abortion, we should likewise recognize that this battle will likely consist of a series of small victories taking place over many, many years. Nevertheless, we ought to thank God for each of these victories and the children saved along the way, while never compromising the conviction that all procedural abortions or abortifacients are murder at any stage of the development process. 

Abortion in any form is a wicked attack upon the dignity of the human person and is to be met with utter disdain. Thus, it was with great frustration that I heard the former president’s words on the debate stage that in some instances mothers should simply “follow their hearts” pertaining to the murder of a living child. This is a morally reprehensible position.  

Nevertheless, on the same stage, President Biden stood beside Trump and promised to do everything within his power to overturn the Dobbs decision. Magistrates are required by God to uphold justice. President Trump does not do that perfectly. In fact, he has even articulated a position of extreme moral compromise. However, whoever the Democrat nominee is will take an even more radical stance. In seeking to bring back the standard of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Democrats promise an even stronger assault on both the sanctity of human life and the Constitution.  

On the issue of the courts alone, Trump has an incredible track record of appointing judges and justices who seek to uphold the law from an originalist perspective, which necessarily will lead to pro-life decisions (i.e. Dobbs). In this way, Trump has upheld justice, both in the here and now and in the generations to come. If the next Democrat president is given four years to make court appointments, we will continue to have injustice reign in America’s courts for decades. The unjust and politically motivated verdict of the former president’s trial in New York could become commonplace in the United States. 

Trump is not a perfect man. He exhibits extreme flaws, especially when considering his recent position on abortion. However, when people vote for a president, they are not voting for a pastor. Though Christians should prefer for our leaders to be above reproach, this is not required by Scripture. An unbelieving magistrate can still broadly perform the role he is given well. We will never have a completely righteous ruler on this side of heaven. Therefore, we ought to choose the man who is more righteous than his opposition.  

Christians live in the reality of a fallen world, thus we ought to approach political questions from a realist perspective. The goal of politics is not to bring about a utopia but rather to constrain sin wherever possible. Consequently, Christians ought to vote for a candidate who constrains the greatest amount of sin. In the instance of the 2024 election, President Trump is the candidate who best promotes that role.  

Some Christians view a vote for Trump as consent to the murder of children and as complicity in a ruler’s sin. However, it seems clear that the general support of a magistrate does not equate to a full endorsement of every aspect of his legislative or private life. The Lord commands Christians to pay taxes to unrighteous rulers. It seems reasonable to assume that Christians do so with greater joy when those taxes go to support a more just ruler than a less just one. In the same way, we can cast a vote for a more just than a less just one. Perhaps the accusation stands that we are choosing the lesser of two evils, but in a fallen world, this is always true to one degree or another.  

One of the dissidents with whom I spoke said that he would not let his Christian daughter marry an unjust and unbelieving man, even if he were the better of the two options she was faced with. However, this does not seem to properly illustrate the ethical concerns of voting in this election.  

America, as a nation, is not a Christian entity. Thus, perhaps the better illustration is as follows: an unbelieving woman approaches you on the street and inquires which of two men she should marry. One has a track record of incompetency, lying, stealing, and general unfaithfulness. The other is still an unbeliever, under condemnation in the eyes of God, but through common grace has broadly upheld justice, exhibited personal sacrifice, and strives to keep his promises. The woman insists she must be married, and she insists it must be one of the two men, so which will you choose?  

I would choose the more just man over the less just. I would do so for the unbelieving woman on the street, and I will do so for our nation. I pray for the election of Trump. I pray for the salvation of Trump. I pray that he upholds a greater standard of righteousness than that which he articulated at the recent debate, and I urge my fellow Christians to do the same.  

Jacob R. Ogan is a student at Boyce College and the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He writes at the intersection of faith, culture, and politics.