Abolitionists have fought on the cultural and political front for over a decade now. Come election time, we are the most unpopular voice in the room. The cyclical nature of the excuses we hear never changes. You may have heard a few of them:

"You're pie in the sky"

"You aren't realists"

"There are political realities we have to deal with"

These arguments are not new. The abolitionists of history have always faced these kinds of arguments. The men who were kept out of the Constitutional Convention at the founding of this nation because they wanted us to acknowledge Christ and abolish slavery in our founding documents faced this same argument. If they had been heeded, the judgment of God would not have swept the land and 600,000 of America's sons would have been spared. The lies of the devil are constantly present.

This does not mean there is no method to the madness. It is not a hopeless endeavor constantly black-pilled by the wickedness of mankind. Abolitionists historically and today and hopeful always, and confident of their victory. We have reason to be optimistic because we don't rely on worldly means for success.

First, a look at history: When the abolitionists of slavery started their great campaign, they knew that they needed to be dissidents, they knew that tolerance of evil required controversy over evil. They acted accordingly, violating the sensibilities of Americans by burning the Constitution, and calling for the dissolution of the nation, which was in their words, "An agreement with hell and death."

At the start of their campaign, they were mobbed in the streets by anti-slavery colonizationists and pro-slavery northerners alike. By the end, they were carried in the streets and cheered. The culture had changed in 30 years, and the winds favored the abolitionists.

In our history, we have seen the advance of the Abolitionist Movement, from being kicked out of churches for being an abolitionist (literally) to now many churches adopting the tenets of abolition and the Southern Baptist Convention adopting abolitionist resolutions. We have come a long way in 12 years, from bills, to legislators, to the largest protestant denomination making overtures to us.

Many even now who despise abolitionists have been forced to admit we were right about the Pro-Life Movement, right about pro-life bills, and right about pro-life legislators. They have, in a sense, become practical abolitionists. Many of these same people, however, have not become principled abolitionists (or real abolitionists), and so when it comes to presidential elections, the hatred is as heated as ever.

Why do the abolitionists take the stance they do on Trump? And further, why did the abolitionists of slavery take the stance they did on Lincoln?

In short, they knew how political paradigms work, but they also knew what it meant to be biblical in a culture of death.

To the first: When a man stands his ground without compromising, all movement is to that man, not away from him. If you want to move the republican party, you must have standards. You can't be the one to move. There is no end of concessions or compromises when you start down that road. It is a never-ending death spiral that results in national and personal ruin. Breaking cultural taboos widens the Overton Window, and forces all, strict opponents or compromising would-be allies to come closer to you.

To the first group, they can either radicalize and alienate, or acknowledge and respond. Both bring greater awareness to the view and further open the window. To the second group, they can reject and show their hand, losing faithful followers to us, or make concessions to avoid appearing weak. Both are gravitations to the man planted with both feet firmly.

Politics has activists and politicians. Many make the mistake of being a politician in their activism. To be a tool of a party does nothing to move that party. It only helps power-hungry men keep power. That is why "Power concedes nothing without a demand."

This quote by Frederick Douglass was of course from a man who shared the abolitionist voting ideology. He knew demands had to have teeth otherwise they were no demands at all. It can be accurately said that political and cultural change is solely achieved by strong and serious demands, and never achieved by unserious demands. This is a tug of war between competing demands, the one who gives inches loses ground.

To the second: God does not give license to compromise because one evil is greater than another. The Christian must reject both evils. This is also not license to be politically inactive. Sluggards have their place in the lake of fire. We have to both engage earnestly and not take the bait of binary choices of evil. Moses once was given such a choice: take the men and women but leave the cattle, or remain in Egypt. He didn't take the bait. Of the two evils presented, Moses chose neither, and continued to make his demands. It could be said that a non-choice was the affirmation of staying in Egypt for the time being, but it was not.

Similarly, refusing to vote Trump is not an affirmation of Biden. It is simply recognizing that both men have promised they will not be a deacon of wrath to evil-doers, and that is precisely what God requires of them.

Allying yourself with evil rulers is explicitly condemned in Scripture. "But," you may say, "I am not allying myself with Trump. I am only using the limited power I have to restrain evil." This is not an argument any reasonable person can defend. Votes are the only thing the American politician needs to gain power. They have need for nothing else. If they could get them without any donation money, they would. It is ALL they need. In other words, the only allies Trump needs are Republican voters, and perhaps whatever moderates he is able to win. If Trump were to appoint a transexual to head the Department of Education, can any reasonable person say he did not ally himself with that person? No, and in the same way, you cannot say YOU did not ally yourself with Trump when you put him in power.

Before concluding this, it would be foolish to fail to anticipate the arguments that will either be posted under this or have already made the rounds. So here are a few.

"If this is true, I can't vote for anyone."

God's standards are not such that no human can meet them when it comes to governing authorities. They have a fairly straightforward job: Punish evil-doers and reward the good. When a candidate promises to fail this simple job, they are not qualified for it.

"I love my family more than I love the unborn."

You are not justified to love your family by doing evil. You are not justified to ignore the iniquity of a tyrant to your neighbors because of perceived benefit to your family. You are responsible to do all that is moral to protect your family, and reject all that is immoral. Allying yourself with wicked rulers doesn't become justified because that ruler grants you greater protection in return. Love God first, and He will care for your every need. He is Sovereign. One hair will not fall from your child's head without His explicit command to do so. He blesses the faithful and drives out the faithless. This argument only works if the above biblical argument is false, so do not commit red herrings that distract from the heart of the issue.

"We just disagree on tactics"

If we can agree that accelerationism is a sinful tactic (voting for the most evil candidate to bring judgment quicker), we should agree that tactics are not morally neutral. In this case, voting for a man that God says "Woe" to is not a morally neutral tactic. When you sin small, you cannot say it was because you didn't want to sin big. God does not honor that, and a lesser evil is still an evil.

In conclusion, we are taking the long view here. We know our nation is in the hands of God, and it ends when He decides. We don't buy the fear-mongering that inevitably arises every election cycle demanding there won't be another election. God decides when and if the nation ends. Since we know judgment is coming for the faithless nation, we choose faithfulness and obedience. If God saves us it will be because of that, not because of how well we managed our sinful choices to gain pragmatic ends.

For it is by this faith the people of God, "conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Women received back their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, so that they might rise again to a better life.  Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment.  They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated—  of whom the world was not worthy—wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth."