You might say that, if citizens are acting for the right reasons in a constitutional regime, then regardless of their comprehensive doctrines they want every other citizen to have justice. So you might say they're all working together to do one thing, namely to make sure every citizen has justice. Now that's not the only interest they all have, but it's the single thing they're all trying to do. In my language, they've striving toward one single end, the end of justice for all citizens.

Many of our most serious conflicts are conflicts within ourselves. Those who suppose their judgements are always consistent are unreflective or dogmatic.

It is of first importance that the military be subordinate to civilian government

There are various ways you might define the common good, but that would be one way you could do it.

An injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even greater injustice.

The intolerant can be viewed as free-riders, as persons who seek the advantages of just institutions while not doing their share to uphold them.

Citizens can have their own grounding in their comprehensive doctrines, whatever they happen to be.