ABSTRACT
This chapter explores justice as discourse by explicating certain principles that it shares with classical liberal theory. It examines what it means to implement justice as discourse as a set of political principles. The chapter considers the sense of 'secularism' that is both implied and necessary in justice as discourse. It discusses what role the theory conceives of for religious discourse vis-a-vis the executive and judicial authority, civil society, legislative provisions and the articulation of political arguments. Justice as discourse is concerned with no pre-set commitments, religious or otherwise, being adopted as determinative of matters of public policy. This limit would apply particularly to those acting for the state through its organised capacities, especially in executive or judicial roles. The most substantial difference between justice as discourse and John Rawls' political liberalism comes in the role that religious outlooks may play in the broad zone of discursive politics and general political debate.
