If you are Islamic, not killing children in the womb might take priority over whether we're funding NASA.
If you are (again) Islamic, what books are being used in your kids school and rooting out LGBT curriculum, takes priority over UNESCO.
If you are an immigrant from Cuba, anything that could be construed as even slightly socialist causes PTSD.
And so on. They have a different moral code, with the "immoral" things this administration does, being generally lower on the priorities list than other things.
Islam is strong opposition in both cases; with the recent "LGBTQ books in school" lawsuit at SCOTUS having Islamic parents in the plaintiffs. Let's not stereotype this as a purely Christian issue.
Islamic people also don't want to bake cakes for the LGBTQ crowd. They're with the Christian baker there.
This is may be true of many Muslims, though they should probably factor the possibility the current administration despises them as a demographic much more than it despises LGBT people into their decision making. In any case, views on Christian bakers don't seem to be a particularly good reason to endorse the behaviour of Trump or believe that international trade is a pissing contest, or mass incarceration without due process or many other things the current administration is far more interested in than SCOTUS lawsuits, and I don't think many of Trump's voters backed him out of adherence to Islam...
Ignoring that most of those example are just false dichotomies, what they claim to prioritize is contradictory. It's more like "If you are Christian, not killing children in the womb and also taking away school lunches from children if their parents can't afford to pay for them"
By definition of what? You're just saying words and claiming them to be true and undebatable. Regardless, these people are claiming to act upon the word of the Bible while ignoring the parts of taking care of the hungry and the poor.
Not all supporters of a given political party agree on everything. They may simply align with the party on the topics that are most important to them, even if they disagree with other topics that are lower on their priority list.
It is disingenuous to suggest that any group of people unilaterally agree on a diverse collection of topics.
If you are Islamic, not killing children in the womb might take priority over whether we're funding NASA.
If you are (again) Islamic, what books are being used in your kids school and rooting out LGBT curriculum, takes priority over UNESCO.
If you are an immigrant from Cuba, anything that could be construed as even slightly socialist causes PTSD.
And so on. They have a different moral code, with the "immoral" things this administration does, being generally lower on the priorities list than other things.