Abstract

As a ubiquitous principle for legislation, › dignity‹ has proved to be successful in providing a principle that is supposed to unite people with different religious and ethical beliefs. Whether such a principle can withstand scrutiny is another matter. If ›dignity‹ is based on one or more characteristics, it is difficult to uphold, while the alternative of abstracting from such characteristics is even more problematic, since finding a basis is in that case all but illusory. Forgoing ›dignity‹ altogether is, in that light, not as unattractive as may at first sight seem to be the case. The burden of justification is lower, while the freedom of citizens to disagree with legislation that binds them is afforded the proper room.