Conservative Tully Borland, writing for the Federalist, took to the internet to explain why a vote for Republican Senate candidate and alleged child molester Roy Moore is still a fine choice in spite of the standing accusations.
As explained by Patheos, his argument rests entirely on the issue of abortion, claiming that even if the accusations against Moore are true, Democratic candidate Doug Jones is the greater evil for supporting reproductive rights.
Jones has gone on record that not only he support abortion, but he supports unrestricted abortion, even opposing a ban on abortion after 20 weeks. This is morally equivalent to supporting infanticide.
Borland’s piece also argues that “politics is never pure” and therefore every vote is for the lesser of two evils. Even so, in his view, one does not lose integrity by voting for a suspected child molester:
In my mind, [Roy Moore’s Democratic opponent’s] position [on abortion] is so extreme that a vote for him is a vote for the greater of two evils by a wide margin. It’s hard to imagine much worse than the mass murder of innocents.
None of this means that one must embrace Moore, as French says, or defend pre-marital sex, or the practice of older men dating teenagers, or attempted rape, and the like. Moreover, one can condemn such actions while still voting for a candidate.