To treat comrades like enemies is to go over to the stand of the enemy. It is evident that some sort of framework is needed to simplify the application of the two principles of justice. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all. Social and economic inequalities are t be arranged so that they are both: to the greatest benefit to the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings, and attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. One must judge the justice of legislation and social policies. However, one also knows that one’s opinions will not always coincide with those of others, since human’s judgments and beliefs are likely to differ especially when their interests are engaged. Therefore, a citizen must decide which constitutional arrangements are just for reconciling conflicting opinions of justice. We may think of the political process as a machine which makes social decision when the views of representatives and their constitutions are fed into it. A citizen will regard some ways of designing this machine as more just than others. #RandolphHarris 1 of 25

So a complete conception of justice is not only able to assess laws and policies but it can also rank procedures for selecting which political opinion is to be enacted into law. There is still another problem. The citizen accepts a certain constitution as just, and one thinks that certain traditional procedures are appropriate, for example, the procedure of majority rule duly circumscribed. Yet since the political process is at best one of imperfect procedural justice, one must ascertain when the enactments of the majority are to be complied with and when they can be rejected as no longer binding. In short, one must be able to determine the grounds and limits of political duty and obligation. Thus a theory of justice has to deal with at least three types of questions, and this indicates that it may be useful to think of principles as applied in a several-stage sequence. The original position is designed to be a fair and impartial point of view that is to be adopted in our reasoning about fundamental principles of justice. Yet, an elaboration of the original position is necessary. So far I have supposed that once the principles of justice are chosen the parties return to their place in society and henceforth judge their claims on the social system by these principles. #RandolphHarris 2 of 25

However, if several intermediate stages are imagined to take place in a definite sequence, this sequence may give us a schema for sorting out the complications that must be faced. Each stage is to represent an appropriate point of view from which certain kinds of questions are considered. Thus I suppose that after the parties have adopted the principles of justice in the original position, they move to a constitutional convention. Here they are to decide upon the justice of political forms and choose a constitution: they are delegates, so to speak, to such a convention. Subject to the constraints of the principles of justice already chosen, they are to design a system for the constitutional powers of government and the basic rights of citizens. It is at this stage that they weigh the justice procedures for coping with diverse political views. Since the appropriate conception of justice has been agreed upon, the veil of ignorance is partially lifted. The persons in the convention have, of course, no information about particular individuals: they do not know their own social position, their place in the distribution of natural attributes, or their conception of the good. #RandolphHarris 3 of 25

However, in addition to an understanding of the principles of social theory, they now know the relevant general facts about their society, that is, its natural circumstances and resources, its level of economic advance and political culture, and so on. They are no longer limited to the information implicit in the circumstances of justice. Given their theoretical knowledge and the appropriate general facts about their society, they are to choose the most effective just constitution, the constitution that satisfies the principles of justice and is best calculated to lead to just and effective legislation. At this point we need to distinguish two problems. Ideally a just constitution would be a just procedure arranged to insure a just outcome. The procedure would be the political process governed by the constitution, the outcome of the body of enacted legislation, while the principles of justice would define an independent criterion for both procedure and outcome. In pursuit of this ideal of perfect procedural justice, the first problem is to design a just procedure. To do tis the liberties of equal citizenship must be incorporated into and protected by the constitution. #RandolphHarris 4 of 25

These liberties include those of liberty of conscience and freedom of thought, liberty of the person, and equal political rights. If it did not embody these liberties, the political system, which I assume to be some form of constitutional democracy would not be a just procedure. Clearly any feasible political procedure may yield an unjust outcome. In fact, there is no scheme of procedural political rules which guarantees that unjust legislation will not be enacted. In the case of a constitutional regime, or indeed of any political for, the ideal of perfect procedural justice cannot be realized. The best attainable scheme is one of imperfect procedural justice. Nevertheless some schemes have a greater tendency than others to result in unjust laws. The second problem, then, is to select from among the procedural arrangements that are both just and feasible those which are most likely to lead to a just and effective legal order. Once again this is Dr. Bentham’s problem of the artificial identification of interest, only here the rules (just procedure) are to be framed to give legislation (just outcome) likely to accord with the principles of justice rather than the principle of utility. #RandolphHarris 5 of 25

To solve this problem intelligently requires a knowledge of the beliefs and interest that humans in the system are liable to have and of the political tactics that they will find it rational to use given their circumstances. The delegates are assumed, then, to know these things. Provided they have no information about particular individuals including themselves, the idea of the original position is not affected. In framing a just constitution I assume that the two principles of justice already chosen define an independent standard of the desired outcome. If there is no such standard, the problem of constitutional design is not well posed, for this decision is made by running through the feasible just constitutions (given, say, by enumeration on the basis of social theory) looking for the ne that in the existing circumstances will most probably result in effective and just social arrangements. Now at this point we come to the legislative stage, to take the next step in the sequence. The justice of laws and policies is to be assessed from this perspective. #RandolphHarris 6 of 25

Proposed bills are judged from the position of a representative legislator who, as always, does not know the particulars about oneself. Statues must satisfy not only the principles of justice but whatever limits are laid down in the constitution. By moving back and forth between the stages of the constitutional convention and the legislature, the best constitution is found. Now the question whether legislation is just or unjust, especially in connection with economic and social policies, is commonly subject to reasonable differences of opinion. In these cases judgment frequently depends upon speculative political and economic doctrines and upon social theory generally. Often the best that we can say of a law of policy is that it is at least not clearly unjust. The application of the difference principle in a precise way normally requires more information than we can expect to have and, in any case, more than the application of the first principle. It is often perfectly plain and evident when the equal liberties are violated. These violations are not only unjust but can be clearly seen to be unjust: the injustice is manifest in the public structure of institutions. #RandolphHarris 7 of 25

However, this state of affairs is comparatively rare with social and economic policies regulated by the difference principle. I imagine then a division of labour between stages in which each deals with different questions of social justice. This division roughly corresponds to the two parts of the basic structure. This division roughly corresponds to the two parts of the basic structure. The first principle of equal liberty is the primary standard for the constitutional convention. Its main requirements are that the fundamental liberties of the person and the liberty of conscience and freedom of thought be protected and that the political process as a whole be a just procedure. Thus the constitution establishes a secure common status of equal citizenship and realized political justice. The second principle comes into play at the stage of the legislature. It dictates that social and economic policies be aimed at maximizing the long-term expectations of the least advantaged under conditions of fair equality of opportunity, subject to the equal liberties being maintained. At this point the full range of general economic and social facts is brought to bear. #RandolphHarris 8 of 25

The second part of the basic structure contains the distinctions and hierarchies of political, economic, and social forms which are necessary for efficient and mutually beneficial social cooperation. Thus the priority of the first principle of justice to the second is reflected in the priority of the constitutional convention to the legislative stage. The last stage is that of the application of rules to particular cases by judges and administrators, and the following of rules by citizens generally. At this stage everyone has complete access to all the facts. No limits on knowledge remain since the full system of rules has now been adopted and applies to persons in virtue of their characteristics and circumstances. However, it is not from this standpoint that we are to decide the grounds and limits of political duty and obligation. This third type of problem belongs to partial compliance theory, and its principles are discussed from the point of view of the original position after those of ideal theory are chosen. Once these are on hand, we can view our particular situation from the perspective of the last stage, as for example in the cases of civil disobedience and conscientious refusal. #RandolphHarris 9 of 25

The availability of knowledge in the four-stage sequence is roughly as follows. Let us distinguish between three kinds of facts: the first principles of social theory (and other theories when relevant) and their consequences; general facts about society, such as its size and level of economic advance, its institutional structure and natural environment, and so on; and finally, particular facts about individuals such as their social position, natural attributes, and peculiar interests. In the original position the only particular facts known to the parties are those that can be inferred from the circumstances of justice. While they know the first principles of social theory, the course of history is closed to them; they have no information about how often society has taken this or that form, or which kinds of societies presently exist. In the next stages, however, the general facts about their society are made available to them but not the particularities of their society are made available to them but not the particularities of their own condition. Since the principles of justice are already chosen, limitations on knowledge can be relaxed. #RandolphHarris 10 of 25

The flow of information is determined at each stage by what is required in order to apply these principles intelligently to the kind of question of justice at hand, while at the same time any knowledge that is likely to give rise to bias and distortion and to set humans against one another is ruled out. The notion of the rational and impartial application of principles defines the kind of knowledge that is admissible. At the last stage, clearly, there are no reasons for the veil of ignorance in any form, and all restrictions are lifted. It is essential to keep in mind that the four-stage sequence is a device for applying the principles of justice. This scheme is part of the theory of justice as fairness and not an account of how constitutional conventions and legislatures actually proceed. It sets out a series of points of view from which the different problems of justice are to be settled, each point of view inheriting the constraints adopted at the preceding stages. Thus a just constitution is one that rational delegates subject to the restrictions of the second stage would adopt for their society. And similarly just laws and policies are those that would be enacted at the legislative stage. #RandolphHarris 11 of 25

Of course, this test is often indeterminate: it is not always clear which of several constitutions, or economic and social arrangements, would be chosen. However, when this is so, justice is to that extent likewise indeterminate. Institutions within the permitted range are equally just, meaning that they could be chosen; they are compatible with all the constraints of the theory. Thus on many questions of social and economic policy we must fall back upon a notion of quasi-pure procedural justice: laws and policies are just provided that they lie within the allowed range, and the legislature, in ways authorized by a just constitution, has in fact enacted them. This indeterminacy in the theory of justice is not in itself a defect. It is what we should expect. If it defines the range of justice more in accordance with our considered judgments than do existing theories, and if it singles out with greater sharpness the graver wrongs a society should avoid, justice as fairness will prove a worthwhile theory. “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught. #RandolphHarris 12 of 25

For God doth not walk in crooked paths, neither doth he turn to the right hand nor to the right hand nor to the left, neither doth he vary from that which he hath said, therefore his paths are straight, and his course is one eternal round. Remember, remember, that it is not the works of Gd that is frustrated, but the work of humans; for although a human may have many revelations, and have power to do many might works, yet if one boasts in one’s own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of one’s own will and carnal desires, one must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon one. For, behold, you should not have feared humans more than God. Although humans set at naught the counsels of God, and despise God’s words—yet you should have been faithful; and God would have extended His arm and supported you against all the fiery darts of the adversary; and God would have been with you in every time of trouble. However, remember, God is merciful; therefore, repent of that which thou hast done which is contrary to the commandment which I gave you, and thou art still chosen, and art again called to work,” reports Doctrine and Covenants 3.1-4, 7-8, 10. #RandolphHarris 13 of 25

Once of the basic concepts of forgiveness is that one must be truly repentant, having satisfied justice before forgiveness can take place. There should be no license for sin, but mercy should go hand and hand with reproof. There are many people who seem to rely solely on the Lord’s mercy rather than on accomplishing their own repentance. The Lord may temper justice with mercy, but he will never supplant it. Mercy can never replace justice. God is merciful, but he is also just. An eternal aspect of justice has been decreed by divine law, that “God is not mocked: for whatsoever a human soweth, that shall one also reap,” reports Galatians 6.7. The gospel of Jesus Christ is founded on law for the salvation and blessing of its people. For every law the Lord give us, there is also a penalty for its violation. The prophet Alma explained this very plainly: “Now,” he said, “how could a human repent expect one should sin? If there was no law, how could one sin? How could there be a law save there was a punishment?” reports Alma 42.17. The Saviour Himself declared that He came to fulfill the law, not to do away with it, but with the law Jesus brought the principle of mercy to temper its enforcement, and to bring hope and encouragement to the offenders for forgiveness through repentance. #RandolphHarris 14 of 25

Liberty can always be explained by a reference to three items: the agents who are free, the restrictions or limitations which they are free from, and what it is that they are free to do or not to do. Complete explanations of liberty provide the relevant information about these three things. Very often certain matter are clear from the context and a full explanation is unnecessary. The general description of liberty, then, has the following form: this or that person (or persons) is free (or not free) from this or that constraint (or set of constraints) to do (or not to do) so and so. Associations as well as natural persons may be free or not free, and constraints may range from duties and prohibitions defined by law to the coercive influences arising from public opinion and social pressure. When we consider liberty in connection with constitutional and legal restrictions, in these cases liberty is a certain structure of institutions, a certain system of public rules defining rights and duties. Set in this background, liberty always has the above three-part form. Moreover, just as there are various kinds of agents who may be free—persons, associations, and states—so there are many kinds of conditions that constrain them and innumerable sorts of things that they are or are not fee to do. #RandolphHarris 15 of 25

In this sense there are many different liberties which on occasion it may be useful to distinguish. Yet these distinctions can be made without introducing different senses of liberty. Thus when their doing something or not doing something is protected from interference by other persons, persons are at liberty to do it. If, for example, we consider liberty of conscience as define by law, then individuals have this liberty when they are free to pursue their moral, philosophical, or religious interests without legal restrictions requiring them to engage or not to engage in any particular form of religious or other practice, and when other humans have a legal duty not to interfere. A rather intricate complex of rights and duties characterize any particular liberty. Not only must it be permissible for individuals to do or not to do something, but government and other persons must have a legal duty not to obstruct. I shall not delineate these rights and duties in any detail, but shall suppose that we understand their nature well enough for our own purposes. #RandolphHarris 16 of 25

First of all, it is important to recognize that the basic liberties must be assessed as a whole, as one system. That is, the worth of one liberty normally depends upon the specification of the other liberties, and this must be taken into account in framing a constitution and in legislation generally. While it is by and large true that a greater liberty is preferable, this holds primarily for the system of liberty as a whole, and not for each particular liberty. Clearly when the liberties are left unrestricted they collide with one another. To illustrate by an obvious example, certain rules of order are necessary for intelligent and profitable discussion. Without the acceptance of reasonable procedures of inquiry and debate, freedom of speech loses its value. It is essential in this case to distinguish between rules of order limit own freedom, since we cannot speak whenever we please, they are required to gain the benefits of this liberty. Thus the delegates to a constitutional convention, or the members of the legislature, must decide how the various liberties are to be specified so as to yield the best total system of equal liberty. They have to balance one liberty against another. #RandolphHarris 17 of 25

The best arrangement of the several liberties depends upon the totality of limitations to which they are subject, upon how they hang together in the whole scheme by which they are defined. While the equal liberties may, therefore, be restricted, these limits are subject to certain criteria expressed by the meaning of equal liberty and the serial order of the two principles of justice. Offhand there are two ways of contravening the first principle. Liberty is unequal as when one class of persons has a greater liberty than another, or liberty is less extensive than it should be. Now all the liberties of equal citizenship must be the same for each member of society. Nevertheless some of the equal liberties may be more extensive than others, assuming that their extensions can be compared. More realistically, if it is supposed that at best each liberty can be measured on its own scale, then the various liberties can be broadened or narrowed according to how they affect one another. When lexical order holds, a basic liberty covered by the first principle can be limited only for the sake of liberty itself, that is, only to insure that the same liberty or a different basic liberty is properly protected and to adjust the one system of liberties in the best way. #RandolphHarris 18 of 25

The adjustment of the complete scheme of liberty depends solely upon the definition and extent of the particular liberties. Of course, this scheme is always to be assessed from the standpoint of the representative equal citizen. From the perspective of the constitutional convention or the legislative stage (as appropriate) we are to ask which system it would be rational for one to prefer. A final point. The inability to take advantage of one’s rights and opportunities as a result of poverty and ignorance, and a lack of means generally, is sometimes counted among the constraints definitive of liberty. I shall not, however, say this, but rather I shall think of these things as affecting the worth of liberty, the value to individuals of the rights that the first principle defines. With this understanding, and assuming that the total system of liberty is drawn up in the manner just explained, we may not that the two-part basic structure allows a reconciliation of liberty and equality. Thus liberty and the worth of liberty are distinguished as follows: liberty is represented by the complete system of the liberties of equal citizenship, while the worth of liberty to persons and groups is proportional to their capacity to advance their ends within the framework the system defines. #RandolphHarris 19 of 25

Freedom as equal liberty is the same for all; the question of compensating for a lesser than equal liberty does not arise. However, the worth of liberty is not the same for everyone. Some have greater authority and wealth, and therefore greater means to achieve their aims. The lesser worth of liberty is, however, compensated for, since the capacity of the less fortunate members of society to achieve their aims would be even less were they not to accept the existing inequalities whenever the difference principle is satisfied. However, compensating for the lesser worth of freedom is not to be confused with making good an unequal liberty. Taking the two principles together, the basic structure is to be arranged to maximize the worth to the least advantaged of the complete scheme of equal liberty shared by all. This defined the end of social justice. These remarks about the concept of liberty are unhappily abstract. At this stage it would serve no purpose to classify systematically the various liberties. Instead I shall assume that we have a clear enough idea of the distinctions between them, and that in the course of taking up various cases these matters will gradually fall into place. #RandolphHarris 20 of 25

When does repentance become effective? When are the demands of justice satisfied? When does the principle of mercy take over? I suppose the answer as clear as that given by Alma: “For behold, justice exerciseth all his demands, and also mercy claimeth all which is her own; and thus, none but truly penitent are saved. What do ye supposed that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God,” reports Alma 42.24-25. This is possible and can be actual for each of us because of what God, the source and governor of all, is. “God is Love.” Yes. However, we must not miss the essential point. The profound good news is not just that he loves us, as is often said. A pretty mean person can love someone for special reasons. “If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than other? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your Heavenly Father is perfect,” reports Matthew 5.46-48. God is Love and sustains His love for us from His basic reality as Love, which dictates his Trinitarian nature. #RandolphHarris 21 of 25

God is in Himself a sweet society of love, with a first, second, and third person to complete a social matrix where not only is there love and being loved, but also shared love for another, the third person. Community is formed not by mere love and requited love, which by itself is exclusive, but by shared love for another, which is inclusive. And within the Trinity there is, I believe, not even a thought of “First, Second, and Third.” There is no subordination within the Trinity, not because of some profound metaphysical fact, but because the members of the Trinity will not have it. The nature of personality is inherently communal, and only the Trinity does justice to what personality is. Aristotle, pagan but profound, says of human personality: The individual, when isolated, is not self-sufficing, and therefore one is like a part in relation to the whole. However, whoever is unable to live in society, or who has no need of it because one is sufficient for oneself, must be either a beast a god. However, this fundamental fact about human personality is rooted in the nature of its Creator, and the writers of the Bible were well aware of it long before Aristotle. #RandolphHarris 22 of 25

We are told on the earliest pages of the Bible that “it is not good that the man should be alone,” and so God decided to make “a helper to be a match for him,” reports Genesis 2.18. Centuries later Paul pointed out that “not one of us lives unto oneself and not one dies unto oneself,” reports Romans 14.7. Paul knew something that Aristotle could not know, however: “whether we live or die we are the Lord’s,” reports Romans 14.8. And for this purpose, “Christ died and lived again, that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living,” reports Romans 14.9. Human beings are really together only in God, and all other ways of “being with” fall short of the needs of basic human nature. The secret of all life-giving relations to others, and of all that is social, lies in the fact that the primary other for a human being, whether one wants it or not, is always God. All human kind is of one Author, and is one volume; when one human dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language, and every chapter must be translated. God employs several translators: some pieces are translated by age, some by sickness, some by war, some by justice. #RandolphHarris 23 of 25

However, God’s hand is in every translation, and His hand shall bind up all our scattered leaves again for that liberty where every book shall be open to one another. “Now I, Moroni, after having made an end of abridging the account of the people of Jared, I had supposed not to have written more, but I have not as yet perished; and I make not myself known to the Lamanites lest they should destroy me. For behold, their wars are exceedingly fierce among themselves; and because of their hatred they put to death every Nephite that will not deny the Christ. And I, Moroni, will not deny the Christ; wherefore, I wander withthersoever I can for the safety of mine own life. Wherefore, I write a few more things, contrary to that which I had supposed; for I had supposed not to have written any more; but I write a few more things, that perhaps they may be worth unto my brethren, the Lamanites, in some future day, according to the will of the Lord,” reports Moroni 1.1-5. God of planting and grown, please bless my work today. Please bring together water and soil and seed, please bring to the abundant rain, snow, light, and air. Please stir life up with them. Please provide rain and snow so my garden will have prosperous growth in the spring and summer. #RandolphHarris 24 of 25

The covenant which God made with Abraham, and His pledge unto Isaac, which God established unto Jacob as a statute, unto Israel for an everlasting covenant; Saying: “Unto you will I give the land of Canaan, as the portion of your inheritance.” When you were but few in number, yea, very few, mere sojourners in the land, wandering from people to people, and from one kingdom to another, God permitted no human to oppress you; yea, for your sake God reproved kings, saying: “Touch not Mine anointed and do My prophets no harm.” Sing unto the Lord, all the Earth; proclaim His salvation from day to day. Declare God’s glory among the nations, His marvellous works among all the peoples. For great is the Lord, and highly to be praised; He is to be revered above all who are worshipped as gods. The gods of the heathens are things of nought; but the Lord made the Heavens. Honour and majesty are before God; strength and gladness are in His abode. Ascribe unto the Lord, O families of humankind, ascribe unto the Lord glory and strength. Render unto the Lord the glory due unto His name; with offerings of homage come into His courts; worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness. #RandolphHarris 25 of 25

Cresleigh Homes

With modern kitchens and the perfect spots to Facetime family, the holidays are just better at @HUBApts. 😄

 Featuring sidewalk-lined streets, parks, Folsom Lake, nature trails, and a comprehensive array of conveniences and amenities, this vibrant community is a place where it is easy to meet friends and your neighbours are like family. https://sites.google.com/fpimgt.com/hubvirtualtours/home

#HUBApts
#CresleighHomes