The following are two quotes by Senator Hillary Clinton. The first was during an interview with Barbara Walters:

“[My faith] was the primary source of help to me. I was raised with faith, and that’s a great gift to give a child, and I have relied on it. I’ve relied on prayer. I had to reach deep down into my own faith and ask myself, you know, what is it that I thought was right to do?”

 The second is from a speech to the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws:

“I think it’s essential that as Americans we look for that common ground that we can all stand upon. [Our] core beliefs and values can guide us in reaching our goal of keeping abortion safe, legal and rare into the next century.”

Although faith and politics can coexist in our country, faith and abortion cannot. Contrasting statements like these make a voter wonder what the candidate actually believes.

Also, they bring to light other compelling issues — gay marriage, for instance — that religious voters, specifically Christians, will need to reconcile when choosing a presidential candidate.

A Christian voter cannot cast his or her vote for a candidate who supports abortion and/or gay marriage.

Both of these issues conflict with Christian doctrine.

This is nothing new.

What is new is how Christians — entire churches, in fact — are turning a blind eye to what were once fundamental truths.

A Christian voter can be against the war, against tax cuts and for universal health care, but he or she cannot be pro-abortion.

Furthermore, although the war, tax cuts and health care are salient issues, they cannot become more important than what one feels is spiritually right.

Christianity is not the only religion that opposes abortion and gay marriage.

Judaism, Islam, Mormonism and Buddhism take very strong stances against abortion and gay marriage.

Yet, it is the Christians who are attacked as “intolerant.”

Why is a religion that stands up for its core beliefs “intolerant?”

Most Americans would define that as courage.

Many Democratic presidential candidates have spoken about how important faith is to them.

Unfortunately, their voting records do not reflect piety.

For example, the Catholic Church tried to put its foot down in 2004 when Senator John Kerry said he was pro-choice. It refused to give him communion.

The church was criticized in the media for being too strict in its enforcement of dogmatic principles.

Christians should worry when their church is bullied by the marketplace of public opinion.

Voters search for a candidate who is open, honest and dedicated to fulfilling the promises made on the campaign trail.

To assess whether the candidate will do that, look at the record.

A Democratic presidential candidate who tells voters and Christian leaders how important faith is to them but then appeals to the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage crowd is dishonest.

Either he or she does not believe his or her religious doctrine or he or she is towing the party line just long enough to secure campaign donations and votes.

What better example of the stereotypical, two-faced politician is there?

One minute Clinton, Senator Barack Obama, and former senator John Edwards are Christians, speaking passionately about “faith, values and poverty.”

The next minute the Constitution does not protect an unborn baby and that marriage should not be defined as between a man and a woman.

There is no greater inconsistency.

Unfortunately, the Republican frontrunner is no better. Rudy Giulianni is pro-choice, but has characterized himself as America’s Great Protector.

Why is he not willing to protect the most defenseless humans in our country?

This is a plea to fellow Republicans: Although Giuliani is right on the war, he is wrong on abortion. It is our duty as social conservatives to protect the unprotected every election cycle.

Those who disagree with my position will call me “out of touch” and an advocate for a “theocratic America.”

They could not be further from the truth.

I do not believe ministers, priests or rabbis should run our country. I do believe, however, a candidate should practice what he preaches.

This is especially important when dealing with issues of faith, which can affect millions of voters.

The electoral decision me we make are crucial.

We must justify each vote we cast — as Americans, Christians, Republicans or Democrats.

Clearly, we will not agree with the candidates on everything.

Issues fundamental to our spiritual beliefs, however, must never be compromised in order to satisfy another political qualm.

Protect what you believe in, and don’t vote for those who attempt to fool you into believing they are something they are not.

Matthew Felty is a public administration junior. His column appears every other Thursday.