In Step Four, we do a moral inventory (page 59). When I signed up to the programme, I signed up to the virtues of selflessness and consideration, amongst others. This means I am committed to living those principles. That does not mean I always succeed, but it does mean that I have settled objectives.
In the implementation of the above and other principles there is certainly broad scope in terms of application, although there are some situations where the morality or immorality of a course of action is beyond reasonable doubt. Is it the sponsor's role to say something in either case, i.e. to discuss the morality of a particular course of action or to express a view?
In asking someone to be a sponsor, I am asking for input not just on the abstract principles of the programme but on their application to my life. It's possible to limit sponsorship to the principles only, and to skirt application entirely, but that would reduce sponsorship to little more than regurgitating the contents of the Big Book.
It is impossible to discuss the practical application of the principles of the programme to concrete situations without invoking the faculty of discernment. In examining application, we are precisely concerned with what is right and wrong, what is selfish and selfless, what is considerate and inconsiderate, and so on.
There are a variety of ways of approaching this. Some sponsors speak plainly and express their views on situations overtly. Others use parables, stories, and accounts of their experience only, and refrain from pronouncing on specific situations. The difference between these two approaches is one of form, not content. Both approaches effectively provide the sponsee with the sponsor's moral discernment of the question. The discernment is merely implied in the latter case.
The latter, covert approach, is the most widely favoured in AA, it appears. It is the least damaging to the pride and is therefore often better received. However, anything short of clear statement is open to interpretation and rationalisation, so I favour straight-talking, from my sponsor, and to my sponsees.
If you ask my view, I'll give it! You, however, are entitled to accept or reject it and to make your own final decision. I just provide one angle of input. That's it. I might change my mind later. I might be entirely wrong. How to view the situation and how to act within it is ultimately between you, your conscience, and your Higher Power, not least because the consequences of any decision you make are your own. I thus cannot pull rank and enforce any view by mandating or stipulating any particular course of conduct.
However, for the relationship to work, there do have to be common values, for instance to do no harm to others and to serve God not self. Whilst there may be somewhat divergent views on such matters, these cause no problem provided that the basic tenets are shared. Where there is a major divergence, there is no basis for the relationship. This could be because of behaviour one or the other person views as harmful. It might simply be a difference in perspective: the sponsor might be chiefly focused on the internal path towards God, and the sponsee might be focused on career or relationships, and vice versa. Withdrawal from the relationship might be necessary where this shared foundation is absent. This does not necessarily reflect a judgement on either person but does recognise that conflicting goals will confound the process.