No one deserves his greater natural capacity nor merits a more favorable starting place in society.

There are two kinds of comprehensive doctrines, religious and secular. Those of religious faith will say I give a veiled argument for secularism, and the latter will say I give a veiled argument for religion. I deny both. Each side presumes the basic ideas of constitutional democracy, so my suggestion is that we can make our political arguments in terms of public reason. Then we stand on common ground. That's how we can understand each other and cooperate.

Ideally a just constitution would be a just procedure arranged to insure a just outcome.

[E]ach person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others.

The fundamental criterion for judging any procedure is the justice of its likely results.

When the basic structure of society is publicly known to satisfy its principles for an extended period of time, those subject to these arrangements tend to develop a desire to act in accordance with these principles and to do their part in institutions which exemplify them

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.