It is possible to conceive of justice in a way that consistently regulates every aspect of society and the lives of its individuals. A religious society, for example, might posit a form of divine law that extends equally to public and private life or distributes social benefits based on particular notions of moral deserving. Fundamentalist regimes such as the Taliban forbid any behavior in the home that violates their sense of public decency, so that adultery or failure to pray are criminal offenses. Polygamist groups in the United States have historically denied young girls the chance to choose their partners, instead handing them over to a caste of privileged elders. These admittedly extreme examples nonetheless demonstrate that there is no way to impose a single moral doctrine upon all of society without “the oppressive use of state power, with all its official crimes and the inevitable brutality and cruelties, followed by the corruption of religion, philosophy, and science (34). This may not stop certain societies from trying, but for Rawls, a liberal society begins with the insight that it is based as much as possible on the voluntary consent of its members who cannot impose one all-encompassing view of what is good and just.