How about we start by defining what those views are?
Because you'll find that this doesn't boil down to vacuous partisan oppositionism, on our part. Hell, I have literally no stake in the American political sphere, myself. What is happening is that we can point to particular and popular views held by Republicans, often outright expressed as platform objectives by Republican representatives, and those views can be pretty easily categorized as objectively unethical in any honest sense.
I'll use "ethical" rather than "moral", because there are some moral codes I find deeply unethical in practice, even if those who hold them would disagree. Like the child-marriage and child-rape practices of FLDS members, to cite an example that should go uncontested. If you'd prefer to agree to a secular humanist model of morality, however, that would work fine too. Religious morality, obviously, has no relevance nor meaning to anyone who does not choose to follow those precepts, and thus doesn't have any business being brought up in these kinds of discussions.
It isn't about judging Republicans as "evil" for being Republicans. It's about pointing to how Republicans goals on issues like abortion rights boil down to "harming and killing innocent women for reasons that are, at best, rooted in religious misogyny, and at worst, are directly and intentionally sadistic." If you're pro-life, that's the valid, objective description of why that view cannot be considered ethical. Because it has no supportive basis in fact nor reason, and contributes directly and widely to harm against innocents.
That view is unethical and harmful, and we judge those that express support for such harms accordingly.
You somehow seem to get this whole approach backwards, and it's baffling.