Opinion Focus

Washington Post opinion columnist Eugene Robinson was online Tuesday, Oct. 10, at 1 p.m. ET to discuss his recent columns and anything else on your mind.

Today's Article: 'Values' Choice for The GOP (Post, Oct. 10)

The transcript follows.

Eugene Robinson is also author of " Last Dance in Havana: The Final Days of Fidel and the Start of the New Cuban Revolution ."

____________________

Eugene Robinson: Welcome, everyone. I'll be here at the keyboard for an hour, as usual, to talk about news and views. For reference, my last three columns could be described as "all Foley, all the time." But of course we can also talk about North Korea's nuclear test (which doesn't seem to have produced a very big bang), the continuing carnage in Iraq (something like 60 bodies found in Baghdad overnight), the midterm elections -- whatever you'd like to raise.

_______________________

Winnipeg, Canada: Thank you for your column today. I think the Foley affair has a lot of traction because nearly everyone can relate it to their daily lives.

In the past few years, most employers have adopted policies and measures to deal with sexual misconduct at work. In most workplaces, no one in their right mind would hear of potential misconduct, as Hastert did, and let it lie. It's SOP to take it straight to HR or superiors; otherwise you look complicit. This is especially true of interns and underage people of either sex and regardless of sexual orientation.

The big liability for the Republicans is that everyone knows what would happen in their lives if a parallel situation were to occur, and the Republican response has been textbook what not to do, other than the Foley resignation. Even here, the resignation should have come several years earlier but didn't, because people in the know did not act responsibly.

This is an issue that every soccer Mom (and Dad) in the country understands intimately. That's why it resonates far more than weightier matters such as nuclear tests in North Korea or increased violence in Iraq.

Eugene Robinson: Well said. Here at the Post everyone has to pass an online course on sexual harassment, and the most important message is that you never just ignore a complaint. You have to investigate and you have to deal with whatever you discover.

_______________________

Gainesville, Va.: I think it's important to be fair in presenting the position of conservative Christians. One key word is "conservative," in its original sense. So much of what we believe in is conserving the values and behaviors we grew up with. By and large the liberal agenda is change (increase tolerance). Thus we are asked to accept homosexual marriage (a new definition after four millennia of accepted usage of marriage as between a man and a woman), a culture that encourages unbridled sexuality of all types, and abortion, the killing of a fetus or baby depending on your beliefs. We never needed laws against homosexual marriage because prior to the decision of the Mass. Supreme Court, marriage was understood to be heterosexual. It is not conservative Christians who are out to legislate morality, it is liberal secularists who are trying to change the laws to support their views.

Eugene Robinson: I agree that the liberal agenda is one of tolerance. But it is not true that the specific moral standards advocated by conservative Christians have been in place for thousands of years. Nor is it true that all the values and behaviors we grew up with are worth preserving. When I grew up, for example, many people considered racial segregation a "value" worth defending. Our standards do change, and often for the better.

_______________________

Vienna, Va.: Mr. Robinson,

In your column today, you wrote: "Condemning others just because they are different doesn't make us stronger or better, it makes us weaker and poorer."

I see your point, but there is a strong counter argument. Shouldn't society instill strong moral standards about sexual behavior? At one time society frowned on people who committed adultery and engaged in sex before marriage. Now neither one is considered taboo. Is modern society better for this?

Today liberals are pushing to consider homosexuality as normal.

What is next? Should bigamy be deemed OK? How about polygamy? In your view, is there anything that society should deem inappropriate? Or should we just allow everyone to live and let live?

Eugene Robinson: That's the slippery-slope argument, and I don't buy it. Of course society has to draw a line between the acceptable and the unacceptable. But society's view of where that line should be drawn has changed many times in the past and will continue to change. The was a time when we considered women second-class citizens unworthy of the vote. There was a time when we thought smoking was cool. Things change.

_______________________

Hayward, Calif.: Why do you think American politics is such that we are reduced to discussing politicians sex lives? It's as though the most important issue in the election is which party's candidates will be less likely to prey on congressional pages.

Eugene Robinson: And of course that isn't the most important issue, by a long shot. But the Foley matter, to me, illustrates how dysfunctional Congress is right now.

_______________________

no Virginia: I'm surprised we haven't heard a thing from the head to the RNC about this corruption, and cover-up on Capitol Hill. I presume he is also advising congressmen how to get beyond this stalking, corruption and child abuse situation and the cover up that has been years in the making. Do you think he also knew about it years ago. What does KEN MEHLMAN have to say about this scandal???

Eugene Robinson: No idea.

_______________________

Annandale, Va: Your beliefs seem to be that we would all be better off if Congress was Democratic and the President was Democratic. Last time that happened I remember 17 percent interest rates and about the same with inflation (early 70s). You rail against the president and Congress yet, economically, interest rates are low, inflation is non-existent, unemployment is very low, and the country is going along nicely economically AND I read in The Post that minority house ownership is at an all-time high in the DC area. Yes, we are at war, but I seem to recall Democratic presidents at war also. With the economy at such a boom, why do you press so much for Democratic Congress/president?

Eugene Robinson: You'll notice that while I have been somewhat critical -- okay, bitterly critical -- of the White House and the Republican-controlled Congress on many important issues, I haven't been touting the Democrats. If they get into office and make a huge mess of everything, I'll yell at them too. And for the record, a lot of Americans don't think the economy is doing all that well; and most polls show the war in Iraq is a vital issue for many voters.

_______________________

Parkville, Md.: Gainesville might want to re-read his Bible. He might find that the idea of marriage as between one man and one woman is a pretty newfangled idea. After all, King Solomon had... what... 700 wives?

We liberals aren't out to legislate morality. We're out to legislate government neutrality. I would never advocate the government forcing a particular congregation or religion to accept gay marriage. But insofar as marriage is a secular, civil contract, gays should have the right to enter into it. Your church can refuse to sanction gay unions, but the government has no business doing so.

Eugene Robinson: Thanks, Parkville.

_______________________

Virginia Beach, Va.: I consider myself a liberal, but I believe that conservatives have been successful in associating the word "liberal" with all kinds of sexual and behavioral attitudes and actions, not what the word means in relation to political philosophy. I'm a liberal and I do not believe in nor practice unbridled sexuality of all types, nor do my liberal friends. I can respect conservatives who sincerely believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman only. I'm sorry that these endless culture wars inflame the electorate and feel that we'd all be better off if everyone could agree to disagree and law-abiding citizens should be able to live their lives without discrimination or demonization. But why does someone like me have to put up with people like Gainesville who wants to equate my political philosophy with encouraging unbridled sexuality of all kinds?

Eugene Robinson: One of the great public relations coups, I think, has been the right's success in associating the word "liberal" with any and all manner of depravity. In the real world, political philosophy does not necessarily equate with personal morality. As the Foley case illustrates.

_______________________

Chicago, Ill.: I think part of the problem is that we all agree on the need to impose societal norms -- we just disagree on which aspects of society need them. Conservatives focus on sex. For example you've just posted two comments from Virginia each complaining that "liberals" are trying to normalize unbridled sexual activity, including adultery and homosexuality. Now whether I (as a supposed liberal) agree with that premise, I think it's also irrelevant. I don't care what people consentingly do to each other in their bedrooms -- I care about whether they're carrying a gun into school, or clear-cutting the rainforest. Conservatives generally oppose the measures I deem important, and vice versa, but we each agree on the need to have them. What infuriates me is when people like those Virginians write in to say, essentially, "it's our society and you are the ones trying to change it."

Eugene Robinson: Society belongs to all of us. And I think there are many issues -- privacy and personal responsibility, for example -- on which even stereotyped "conservatives" and "liberals" agree.

_______________________

Philadelphia, Pa.: I'd like to point out that the definition of marriage for four millenia has not been between a man and a woman. In most societies, yes, marriage has been heterosexual, but it certainly has not been limited to 'a' man and 'a' woman. Nor has it been limited to adults. Nor has it, in fact, been limited to heterosexuals. Nor has it had much to do, at all, with love until recently - marriages were business transactions, usually to transfer property, between two parties who often weren't the husband(s) or wife(wives). In some societies, marriages existed solely to have children, and if no children were produced there was no marriage.

So, if people are going to be insist that marriage in this country be 'traditional,' they'll need to be a little more clear about what they mean - a love match? an arranged marriage? A man taking on his brother's widow and five children? An 80-year-old 'marrying' a 5-year-old? One man, three wives? One woman, three husbands? Two men? Two women?

Eugene Robinson: A good history lesson.

_______________________

Baltimore, Md.: Pundits on TV and in print are saying that the Foley mess is going to have a hand in deciding the mid-terms, that conservative Christians will stay home, but every time they interview one of these folks, s/he says that they'll still vote Republican (perhaps holding the nose at the time). It seems to me that it's the independents who are going to swing this thing, not the Christians right. What do you think?

Eugene Robinson: I think the mid-terms are going to be close. The polls showing Democrats way ahead are significant, but you have to look at individual races. My guess is that the Foley mess will have some impact, but if Republicans lose control of either house of Congress it will be because of a whole host of issues -- Foley, Iraq, the general sense that Congress isn't getting much done of any importance.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: RE: Annandale: Your memory is as faulty as your reasoning. Actually, the last time we had a Democratic Congress and president was during Bill Clinton's first two years, 1993-1995. Yes, they made mistakes (and paid the price in the 1994 elections) but we had peace and prosperity...

Eugene Robinson: Thanks for setting the historical record straight.

_______________________

Maryland: So you don't buy the slippery-slope argument? I recall over 20 years ago when the ERA amendment was being debated, and one argument against it, which its proponents denied, is that it would lead to same-sex marriages! I say it's just a matter of time before the NAMBLA crowd starts lobbying against child-protection laws as being discriminatory to their own particular lifestyle - but that's progress to the progressives, isn't it?

Eugene Robinson: But by your logic, women would never have been given full rights in our society, or blacks, or anybody except white men. Just because you decide to take one specific step in the direction of inclusion and tolerance does not mean you then have to take every imaginable subsequent step.

_______________________

Annandale, Va.: You say, "If the Democrats make a huge mess out of everything you will yell at them too."

I read your columns. Tell me what Democrats you have ever criticized. I don't recall any.

Eugene Robinson: Well of course I've criticized William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson, the congressman who kept $90,000 in his freezer; and I've criticized Democrats who have taken what I consider overly punitive positions on immigration. But the Republicans are in charge of the White House and all of Capitol Hill. It's hard to slam the Democrats for making the wrong policy decisions when they don't get to make any policy decisions.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Mr. Robinson,

I've asked you once, I asked you twice, let me ask you a third time to gauge your current opinion: Does Sen. Obama run for Prez in '08?

Eugene Robinson: Odds still against an Obama candidacy. Ask me again after the midterms.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Whenever a conservative says that we should keep something traditional like the definition of marriage, liberals trot out the same tired argument that without change women and blacks would never have gotten their due rights.

What does one have to do with the other? The definition of marriage is a completely separate issue than women's voting rights or blacks' civil rights. Why confuse the issue? Or can't you argue the case on its own merits?

Eugene Robinson: Interracial marriage was once illegal in Southern states. So, no, these are not completely separate issues.

The argument on the merits is simple, in my view. Two individuals are gay and want to make a commitment to each other through marriage. What is bad about that? How does that threaten me, or you, or anyone else? My marriage will not dissolve if gay people are allowed to marry. The world will not cease its orbit around the sun. We'll all be fine, believe me.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: What "values" are we preserving? It's like people actually believe that everyone's lives back in the 1950s emulated those of the Cunninghams. Not even close. Views toward spousal abuse, rape, and race were all very different in the 1950s than today. Thankfully, our attitudes are changing. If by embracing these changes makes me a liberal, then I am guilty as charged. I also think it's what makes me a good Christian.

Eugene Robinson: Values have always changed and will continue to change. It's not always an easy passage, though.

With that, I have to sign off -- my time is up. Thanks for participating, and see you again next Tuesday.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.