Rawls' Liberalism

He imagines a community of agents, without further knowledge of them. 

This view seems inconsistent with recent political experience, which focuses on
ethnic, racial, gender groups. 

He assumes a secular society, in the following sense.
	Participants may be religious, but they do not primarily define themselves by
their religion. 

Their public morality is not based upon a sacred text. 

	Behind the veil of ignorance they suspend knowledge of their particular

That is-as in America-these religious people form a secular state. 

For Rawls, Liberalism means: There are conflicting, incommensurable conceptions
of good
	No one can claim to know THE TRUTH and be allowed to act accordingly.

Everyone must agree to 'live and let live'
As European Christians agreed, mostly, at some point to pursue their debates in
private, and not invoke state authority. 

A society ruled according to some religious way of life, or in terms of some
conception of ethnic identity, would have no reason to adopt Rawls' way of

(This account is drawn in part from Rawls' publications coming after A Theory
of Justice.)