@Liberty Tree Dr Guidance by morals is not emotional, but if you ignore the potential results of your choices because you want to "feel" that you're doing the right thing, that is not a logical behavior. You should be asking, "Is the result of my choice a good or bad thing according to my morality?" If you don't, there's the risk of the legalism of the Pharisees type.
In other words, unless my moral guidance takes me to the conclusion you think is correct, then it
is emotional.
Nope.
Nope. As @don-o indicates, I'm a former Cruz guy. I plead my case almost exactly as you did on TOS, and was banned. In 2012, I fought many the rhetorical battle against Romney during the Primaries. Same in 2008 against McCain. But then my candidates lost in the primary each of those years, and I held my nose.
I'm not pleading a case. I don't care if my decision is met with approval or not. If I'm the last NeverTrumper standing, I'm fine with that.
As I stated elsewhere, I held my nose for Romney in 2012, despite prayer and being convinced I was led not to do so, and the next day began a spiritual crisis for me that lasted for years. I won't go into the details. I'll just say that my nose-holding days are done. And Trump makes Romney look like Ronald Reagan.
Why? Because logic dictates you must examine your options and choose the best outcome. Primary was decided. Trump is nominated. In the USA, a third party candidate is a spoiler that favors the Democrat. We get to pick one of two (2 point swing), or vote 3rd party/not vote and give a 1 point advantage to the Democrat (i.e. 1 less vote to get the majority).
No,
you get to pick only one of two because apparently you're under the impression someone is holding a gun to your head. In reality, you can do whatever you want, and I'm through with loyalty to a political party that holds my values in total contempt.
Especially when it expects me to cast my support behind an amoral, pathetically ignorant dumpster fire of a human being. Refusal to do so, for me, is the best outcome. I'm not going to delude myself for a second that God is fine with that.
If you want morality, you now must review the possible results of your actions. EXAMPLE: Hillary wins = 100% chance abortion continues forever and this is guaranteed via her SCOTUS picks and the massive amnesty she'll unleash to seal the Progressive agenda. If you think a Trump win will also yield 100% chance, then both outcomes are equally bad morally. However, if this declines even 1%, so that there's a tiny chance Trump's SCOTUS picks might reverse Roe v. Wade, logic would indicate you favor that chance. Hope for that 1% chance is emotional, choosing an action on that 1% chance is logical, as it is marginally superior to the results of the other chance.
I've seen the video in which Trump said he wouldn't do a thing to stop partial-birth abortion. To clarify, that's the process of driving scissors through a newborn's skull to kill it. I will never support such an individual, nor do I think for one moment that he's changed. And I refuse to tell myself that it would be moral for me to do so.
Trump has backtracked on his wall and he's on record saying that we have to take in Middle Eastern refugees. That latter remark was his instinct before someone told him he needed to walk it back.
Trump recently said he didn't care if the Senate went to the Democrats. To believe that he would appoint decent judges is a desperate fantasy. The man is a lifelong liberal without a single conservative impulse in his nature, nor even basic knowledge of conservative principles.
As bad as Hillary is, many on our side have fallen into the
emotional trap of building her up into some kind of mythical Godzilla; there could never in the world be anyone worse. We cringe in terror of her, hide under our beds, and we're so desperate that we try to convince ourselves that a stupid game show host would be an improvement. Even though we're aware that he's as liberal as she is, and is in fact a longtime friend and donor. Now, if that's how you feel, okay, fine. But many of us believe otherwise.
The truth is, there
can be someone just as bad as Hillary, and he's running with an R behind his name.
Bottom line: I fear God more than I fear Hillary Clinton.
You and I can debate the chances, and we can disagree, but do cease claiming you are moral while we are not.
You want to show me where I accused you of being immoral?
As I've outlined above, we are acting under a very robust moral model that takes into account consequences/actions, rather than adherence to dogma that then results in a greater evil.
As I've just shown you, there is no moral difference---only a perceived one that fear of Hillary Clinton has placed in your mind. With that, I'll ask you to
stop assuming NeverTrumps haven't thought through the consequences. We have---honestly.