A political conception covers the right to vote, the political virtues, and the good of political life, but it doesn't intend to cover anything else.

Public reason arguments can be good or bad just like other arguments.

What's important is that people give the kinds of reasons that can be understood and appraised apart from their particular comprehensive doctrines: for example, that they argue against physician-assisted suicide not just by speculating about God's wrath or the afterlife, but by talking about what they see as assisted suicide's potential injustices.

The natural distribution is neither just nor unjust; nor is it unjust that persons are born into society at some particular position. These are simply natural facts. What is just and unjust is the way that institutions deal with these facts.

The concept of justice I take to be defined, then, by the role of its principles in assigning rights and duties and in defining the appropriate division of social advantages. A conception of justice is an interpretation of this role.

An intuitionist conception of justice is, one might say, but half a conception.

Thus I assume that to each according to his threat advantage is not a conception of justice.